| | | You are providing misinformation for prospective and current investors. Perhaps you would like to identify the misinformation that I provided
I said:
Why are you posting to me?
Microblind technology has the Canadian government behind it.
Nanocrystal technology has Lawrence Berkeley Labs behind it
SPD has Joe Harary |
REFR refused government funding on purpose so we could "own" the technology. And how do you know that? There's nothing on their website that says that they refused government funding. You won't find anything with google or bing that says that references that information. But there is more that I don't understand. I have worked for companies that have received government funding. And guess what, they got to keep the technology. In fact, the company I work for today had some initial government funding and it owns the technology with no obligation to the government. I don't know why REFR may have refused government funding, if they did. But I know that it isn't for the reasons you stated.
I do know why you didn't borrow or go with venture funding. There are smart investors and dumb investors (ok, let's call them "uninformed"). If REFR had gone with debt funding, they would have had to pay it back. Which there is no way they wanted to do that. But more importantly, a company that can deliver a product or make money after 20 years is not a candidate for debt funding. Same with venture capital. Venture would laugh at a company that came to them after 20 years of non-delivery of product or revenues. Notice how I am using 20 years and not 48 years? Venture capital isn't going to wait for a royalty sucking/cash shredding business model like REFR's. They want to get in early and make money quickly. REFR didn't choose to fund their company through shareholder dilution, they didn't have a choice.
We do the research and improvements, which is why our patent portfolio has grown to over 500 patents and patents pending. You accused me of providing misinformation. Your patent portfolio grew to over 500 patents because of why? your research and improvements? How many patents have you purchased vs how many have you developed and gone through the patent award process? Claiming that your research and improvements is what brought your patent portfolio to over 500, is definitely misinformation. It exaggerates your technical capabilities and disguises the fact that there were and are other patented SPD technologies out there. (Note to Dmitry: The use of the pronouns "you" and "your" are appropriate when the other party uses the possessive pronoun "our").
Those protect our investment out 20 years each time an new generation or application is developed. Half of our expenses go to this work. Actually, what those patents do, best case scenario, is make it difficult for anybody to sue you for patent infringement. Since many of your patents are either expired or soon to expire, for the most part, they will provide a solid starting point for other entrepreneurs who want to pursue your $60 trillion dollar market.
I welcome the discussion of smart glass and am glad I can help you be more informed. Since the information that you provided is a bit misleading, I think that you failed in your efforts. |
|
