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.

Pastimes : Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joseph B. Schmidt who wrote (26777)	7/25/2012 8:02:51 PM
From: PaperProphet	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 53574

"The choice was go with that processor or spend a couple years designing dramatic improvements that would result in greater profitablity and faster roll out of processor capacity." "I think hands down the right choice was made and whatever volume wasn't processed in the past couple years will be more than offset in the future by a very high factor. " Sure. Why order and assemble even one off-the-shelf $80,000 processor in a month which can net almost $1 million per quarter, prove the concept and largely offset expenses when instead the processor can be improved and improved and improved for years and costs of $48 million until it's so good that it incapacitates itself and makes roll out impossible?? If anyone has taken any business classes, they can see that if there's a supposed 'unfair advantage' like Mr. Bordynuik claims he has in the catalyst, that advantage should be exploited and everything else should be left to those who are good at the other parts--i.e. all the people who have been trying to make pyrolysis profitable and have robust machines that only need a magical catalyst. But oops, that's only Mr. Bordynuik being stupid again right? It's just not possible that Mr. Bordynuik lied about the capabilities of his catalyst and that he's misrepresenting the true state of affairs with lying by omission, right?? Since all shareholders believe 'fuel' can be produced for less than $10/bbl and sold for WTI, I'm sure Mr. Bordynuik would clarify those numbers of they were no longer true, right??