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 : Zenyatta Free Speech Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glorieux who wrote (18247)	8/7/2017 11:04:30 PM
From: NuclearCrystals	Respond to of 22811

Francis, how do you translate those bolded statements into most if not all the other graphenes out there

To: Glorieux who wrote (18247)	8/8/2017 10:58:20 AM
From: Fact Czecher	Respond to of 22811

Glorieux - You are now claiming that "ZEN's graphene has been compared to most if not all the other graphenes out there." To "prove" your point you give us 4 quotes that speak highly of ZEN's graphite when used to produce graphene. I have to admit to a certain level of confusion on my part. Would you mind clearing things up for me? I thought ZEN had always claimed that their "niche" was to replace SYNTHETIC graphite and the graphene produced from it. ZEN supporters have always claimed that they could produce graphite/graphene much cheaper than the synthetic producers and now you are claiming it is also "better". It is a given that flake (natural) graphite and the graphene produced from it are being sold TODAY for less than ZEN's cost of production. And yet, Mr Dube, you have presented us with 4 quotes that do not make any mention of "synthetic graphite". The 2 most glowing quotes specifically mention that they are comparing ZEN to "natural (flake) grahite". The other 2 quotes make no mention of "synthetic". I guess if you are a pumper, you feel entitled to assume the best case scenario. I'm sure most of us would have a little more confidence in your claim if you could present some evidence that graphene produced from ZEN's graphite is "better" (as well as cheaper) than the graphene produced from synthetic graphite. The evidence would be even more persuasive if you could quote someone whose employment was not dependent on government and/or industry grants to test the graphite in question. Has ZEN given up on being a cheaper, "better" replacement for synthetic graphite and its many uses (including producing graphene)? Are they now lowering their sights and hoping to break into the market now controlled by FLAKE producers? Being "better" than Flake is a low bar and immaterial if you can't compete with the cost.