Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Energy Conversion Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Hoff who wrote (4099)	10/9/1999 9:44:00 AM
From: Michael Latas	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8393

The new NiMH battery described by Toyota has to be ours and not the royalty-free, old, outdated NiMH misch-metal batteries of Matshushita/Panasonic. This older technology was used by Toyota in Japan where they sold 24,000 Prius' last year. They lacked poorly in acceleration, among other areas. However, this was not a serious problem in Japan where traffic is slower than in the USA. Toyota made statements to Automotive News last year, that I posted on a couple of different occasions, that they were going to have to improve their acceleration before bringing the Prius here. And, they can't get it from their batteries. I also raised the question of how much difference could there possibly be in the cost of mfg'g our battery vs theirs. It would have to be rather insignificant, if not pretty much the same. There is no contest in overall performance features and benefits with our technology vs. theirs. Remember, Stempel stated in his handout to the security analysts in New York in July that we would be announcing that a current Japanese consumer NiMH battery licensee would be entering into an agreement with ECD to mfg'r larger batteries. There was some speculation as to who it might be. And, Panasonic was one of the likely names that surfaced. Remember, Toyota has entered into a shared advanced technology agreement with General Motors. All of the pieces fit into place. All we need is for this to be confirmed. I only hope we don't have to take them back to court as we had to the last time. The big difference from then to now is that we did not have our basic patents approved in Japan back then. But, since then our basic patents have been awarded in Japan in pretty much of a landmark case. The Japanese don't treat these matters lightly. It is next to impossible to achieve this feat on any basic patents in Japan. But, we were successful and won. This should help our case. Regards.

To: Tom Hoff who wrote (4099)	10/9/1999 10:08:00 AM
From: Ray	Respond to of 8393

Tom, I wish I new the answer to your question about the Panasonic NiMH batteries to be used by Toyota for their new power train. The key sentence from the news release you posted is: "Toyota equipped the new power train with a newly developed nickel-metal hydride battery that can generate the same levels of power as its older version despite a 40% cut in its volume and a 20% weight reduction." This is a somewhat ambiguous statement. Does it refer to a new NiMH battery (one that would have to be based on new basic technology since Panasonic/Matsushita are not licensed from ECD)? Or, is the "older version" a reference to another type of battery (advanced lead-acid, perhaps) that was used earlier? Wouldn't the achievement of a commercial-stage, new-technology NiMH battery by Panasonic have been announced separately and earlier than now? Perhaps, instead, Panasonic has simply produced an improved version of their old NiMH technology, which would not violate the ECD patents. I think their NiMH batteries produced about 60 WH/Kg, so an increase of 20% would put them at 72 WH/Kg -- not very competitive, EXCEPT for cost. This, the cost, is IMO the main reason why our batteries are not being used more in vehicles. GM could have solved this problem simply by assuming the costs and risks of selling the GM-Ovonic batteries at, initially, a loss to capture market share -- like Japanese companies are wont to do. Stupid, if not shameful, behavior on GM's part, IMO.