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: Joe Hoofnagle who wrote (505)	2/8/1998 10:50:00 AM
From: inchingup	Respond to of 50136

Hi Joe: Thanks for your very informative post. It seems that everyone feels that I am bashing REFR. This is not the case and never has been. There were several questions bothering me, and now I am beginning to get answers, thanks to several peoples help. Any problems the Co. is or was having should be made much more public than they currently have been. Whether the financing is private or public should not make a difference. Each owner is entitled to all information available, NOT BASED OF COURSE ON THE VALUE OF THAT INVESTMENT. Yes, I was disappointed with the conference call, as it provided no new additional info, and Joe seemed to skirt pertinent issues with political rhetoric. I meant no offense to anyone, but still believe that by the issuance of licenses to manufacture a product..and publicizing this info without explaining the ramifications, (i.e., we still have problems to resolve before the product can be manufactured, and don't know when they will be resolved) fully, creates anticipation that PRODUCT IS IMMINENT. So the next question was, SHOW ME THE PRODUCT! Thanks for your help-- GARY.

To: Joe Hoofnagle who wrote (505)	2/8/1998 11:13:00 AM
From: Michael Klausner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 50136

Gary: You seem to have a naive view of the nature of technological developments: that is: the process by which scientific breakthroughs are translated into specific, practical applications. SPD is a TRULY REVOLUTIONARY breakthrough; it involves principles of physics as well as chemistry and materials science as well as other disciplines. The application of the breakthrough to specific products: windows, eyeglasses, rearview mirrors, etc. IS NOT, REPEAT IS NOT A CLEAR-CUT LINEAR PROCESS, rather it is best seen as a ZIG ZAG process two steps forward, one backward; one problem overcome but than another one, totally unexpected develops which has to be solved. If you read the history of scientific breakthroughs and their application to specific products you will see that my conceptualization of the process is correct. There are a multiplicity of potential problems that are apt to develop as a company is attempting to incorporate a new and revolutionary technology into a specific product. Huge RD budgets and many Phd researchers help but many times progress in solving certain problems take TIME, deep thinking; sometimes serendipity is responsible for the "answer" to a particular problem. You seem to be sincere and receptive to responses to your questions. I URGE you to study the history of the development and application of scientific breakthroughs. Doing so will be enlightening for you. Another thing: the SPD technology is a TOTALLY NEW, REOVLUTIONARY, UNTESTED, UNAPPLIED technology... most U.S. corporations are "chicken" they want someone else to try something new before they do. That is probalby one of the reasons why so many of the REFR licensees are of foreign countries. Despite all the "talk" of the American entreprenaial spirit, the truth is that most U. S. companies do not want to be the first one to use a new, untested technology. They want to play it safe. Your previous posted question as to why, if the SPD technology is so good, REFR does not make the film and products using the film itself is absurd: do you realize how much captial investment would be needed in order for REFR to do such a thing and it would be very difficult for REFR to convince venture capitalists to fund such an untested and new technology. The route that REFR went is the wise and brilliant one:if the application of the technology is a success then they will simply collect $$$$$$$$$$ from the licensees and work with them in refining the process and extending it. Of course problems will be encountered in applying the technology to specific products but indications are that those problems can and have been solved and I would be astonished if more would not develop. The company and its licensees are WISE in taking their time and trying to anticipate and deal with problems rather than rushing to get a product out ASAP and then having the whole world experience the problem. Please, please, keep in mind that both basic science and the application of scientific breakthroughs progresses both INCREMENTALLY AND NON-LINEARLY...if interested I can send you references to validate my points. Having said all of this, I admit that there is a possibility that some completely unanticpated problem in applying the technology to a product may ensue and that it could not be adequately dealt with. Indications, however, are that such is not likely to be the case. My own feeling is that REFR and its SPD technology is going to be either a BASES LOADED GRAND SLAM HOME RUN or a strikeout. As of now I believe that the probability is greater that the former rather than the latter will happen.