To: water-world-man who wrote (9 ) 8/8/2002 7:54:50 PM From: ms.smartest.person Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 18 That said, I believe this LOI is for real. Do you have some info that was not in the PR or filed documents? There is virtually nothing to go on out there. I have emailed a contact at the Las Vegas newspaper and he is checking. dodge.hoovers.telebase.com This has the odor of a reverse merger. I am very suspiscious when an extensive search turns up nothing but the company filings and press releases - not even an article or mention of JetWater in trade publications. IMO if the JetWater System was as good as they claim, why wouldn't it take off when R&D was being done in a state and, more particularly a city that has no water. Well, they have some - maybe more than Colorado, but that's nothing to write home about. LOL IMO The PPS is huge when they do not have a working prototype - unless I read the published info wrong. I believe that Sand & whatever company signed the LOI based on the Centre testing. And who the heck is that Sand & whatever - can't find anything on them in Aust, but hope my contact can. Who's gonna build it? And used jet engines ... I would think those are not as easy to buy today - after 9/11 BWDIK. Not impressed with the testing Centre - sent a note off to a physicist friend in Australia. Centre is under the Mining, etc. in Queensland and is a quasi-public/private Centre. All that said was it was tested, but I have not seen any published reports that included detailed data from the Centre. Have you seen a patent #? All I saw was patent application had been filed in Australia, but was done as a multiple-country(20?) application. I have not searched the US Patent Office yet - leaving that to when I have time (or a grunt to do it for me). Again ... on the websitethere is no email address, not even any mention of IR - not unusual for an OTC - just frustrating. Merry