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 : Research Frontiers (REFR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: inchingup who wrote (5217)	4/8/2004 7:00:15 PM
From: inchingup	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 50557

REFR’s fraudulent patent promotion exposed, reports Asensio & Company, From the author of SOLD SHORT: Uncovering Deception in the Markets. Research Frontiers Incorporated (Nasdaq: REFR, $--) constantly promotes that it controls 365 SPD patents throughout the world, apparently in an attempt to support their claim that its 35-year-old profitless SPD story is commercially viable and thereby convince investors should buy their stock at today’s $---- million market price. We believe REFR’s patent history more accurately supports the exact opposite conclusion.Of course, patents are only valuable if they protect a profitable product from competition and REFR does not have and has never had a profitable product. However, we believe that REFR’s patent history shows both the extent of SPD’s commercial failure and the willingness of REFR’s stock promoters to distort, or perhaps fabricate facts, to sell their grossly overpriced stock to investors. REFR has had SPD patents since at least 1972 with no commercial success.REFR only has 19 U.S. patents. In fact, the number is even smaller given that an undisclosed number of REFR’s allegedly enforceable patents cover earlier SPD versions and SPD features that REFR admits it will not exploit. We found that at least 18 U.S. REFR SPD patents have expired worthlessly without any commercial product eploitation. Therefore, there are almost just as many old expired SPD patents that are in the public domain than there are allegedly enforceable U.S. REFR SPD patents. Anyone can use these expired REFR SPD patents and no one is using them.Also the number of patents and applications REFR promotes is highly questionable. But a patent investigation yields even more seriously damaging information about REFR’s investor representations policies. In 1999, between May 21st and June 10th, REFR increased the number of patents and patents pending it was promoting from 121 to 275.This implies that REFR added 154 “patent-able ideas” to its patent stock promotion in 21 days with no disclosure of its alleged inventions. Then on June 11th it announced it purchased 74 patents and applications from Gravel, S.A. and began claiming 351 patents.This is actually 2 more than the sum but its one-day later and REFR patents seem to mutate, and this announcement leads to far more serious evidence concerning REFR’s intent. In the June 11th announcement REFR did not disclose that it only paid a single lump-sum payment of $289,177 for the 74 SPD patents and applications.Nor did REFR disclose that Gravel had been a SPD licensee since 1992.In fact, REFR once claimed that Gravel had built and demonstrated a SPD rear-view mirror with a substantial advantage over Gentex Corporation’s (GNTX; $--) mirror.In the Gravel statement REFR noted that Gentex’s allegedly “inferior” mirror business had a market value of $520 million.We believe this statement clearly is meant to imply that REFR’s stock could or should be worth far more than $520 million given the rear-view mirrors are but a small part of REFR’s potential business.This promotional REFR statement was shown to be wildly promotional at best when Gravel sold its SPD patents and applications to REFR for $289,177. REFR’s SPD has never been successfully commercially exploited.REFR has never provided any independent verifiable opinion that SPD has overcome its inherent design defects that include particle settling, degradation and coloration problems. Furthermore, even assuming SPD actually works and is sufficiently durable, SPD would merely be one of many products in a highly competitive market controlled by existing companies that have successfully produce and sold proven display and smart glass products since the early 1980s. We see no purpose for REFR’s highly questionable patent claims proomotion, and REFR other seriously questionable promotions, other than to encourage investors to buy and hold shares of REFR’s stock. These highly questionable investor representations and REFR insider stock sales and cash compensation lead us to firmly believe that REFR is nothing more than a over blown stock fraud. ragingbull.lycos.com

To: inchingup who wrote (5217)	4/8/2004 10:38:15 PM
From: Edscharp	Respond to of 50557

Gary, Ooooh. I just recognized this one. This is one of abe's all-time classics wherein he accused me of being a pump and dump con artist and accused me of shorting while I'm pumping. By the way, when abe posted this one Shaman was already deep in bankrutpcy. Shaman was on the pinksheets and there was very little trading activity on the company in November, 2003. You can check for yourself. Here's the link. pinksheets.com Needless to say rumors of my arrest have been exaggerated as well. Gary, this is truly shameless. And, you claim to be a great researcher?? I don't think so.