A New Direction
This is the first time Zen has engaged in bandying about pricing numbers for graphene (using Albany graphite) that essentially equate to ‘hitting the ball out of the park’.
Justification
In substantiating these numbers five major studies were referenced including the work done by Alliance Rubber in conjunction with Sussex University (Dr. Alan Dalton). The studies conclude Zenyatta graphite exfoliates easily to graphene using a fairly simple mechanical process. The result is a high quality product that disperses well and is characterized as mono to tri-layered graphene (though apparently mono-layered graphene can include up to 5 successive layers, hence an acceptable thickness of .35 nm all the way to 1.75 nm. Question: does this mean tri-layered graphene could include up to 15 layers?).
Pricing Model
In its press release Zen maintains, “A significant business opportunity has now evolved related to this graphene product which currently sells at prices of US$1000’s/kg”, a pricing reference which replaces the previous PEA number of $7.50 per kg. The new figure is well below the dollar values referenced in the Graphene-Mass-Normalized Price and Nomenclature Comparison table presented on page 5 of Graphene Magazine (issue 7), and yet it is well over one hundred times the value previously used by Zenyatta itself.
Questions
1. What does , “A significant business opportunity has now evolved” specifically mean? Is it a reaction to the pricing numbers claimed in the Graphene Magazine article, or does it reference a real business transaction involving Zen and other party(ies)? The latter would blow the doors off the current sp.
2. Where does the US $1000s/kg figure come from? It is not listed in the referenced Graphene Magazine table. Was it pulled from a hat? Does it include any pricing value between $1000 and $9999/kg? Will Zen be more specific about where they got this figure from in the near future?
3. (Legitimate confusion on my part) Why does a very key Zen player, U of Sussex’s Dr Alan Dalton say about graphene based rubber bands (not just any rubber band but essentially they are medical based sensors that can read a patient’s vital info, “Until now, no such sensor has been produced that meets these needs …It sounds like a simple concept, but our graphene-infused rubber bands could really help to revolutionize remote healthcare–-and they’re very cheap to manufacture.”. I’m not trying to undermine Zen’s claims – just understand them – how can the graphene sell for US $1000s/kg and yet the bands are ‘very cheap to manufacture’?
* And yes I realize the produced graphene would only constitute a very small per-centage of the final rubber band end product, and that an important aspect of this is that the graphene disperses evenly throughout the admixture.
4. Why is Zen referencing these pricing numbers only now when they have been available since April, 2017?
Exciting times ahead! I stick to my claim from two days ago that there is extreme upside to Zen, and yet at the same time there are some confusing uncertainties that need addressing from a company that has previously never engaged in boastful PR rhetoric. |
