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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : BAAT - world records for electric vehicles with zinc-air -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gutterball who wrote (1818)	2/16/1998 11:29:00 AM
From: daveG	Respond to of 6464

Errors in the USA Today article.(at least one) It says in paragraph 3 "B.A.T. President Joseph LaStella - who claims to have developed a diesel automobile engine that can get nearly 100 miles to a gallon of fuel..." I've talked to Mr. LaStella and I've read the Co material and I bought the stock and I was never told the the Co. "developed a diesel engine." I am sure that the USA Today did not mean to write it that way? This next paragraph may not be an error but as written it sure makes the Co look like they are doing something illegal. "B.A.T. survived on the sale of large blocks of unregistered stock to individual investors." I am sure that the USA Today staff writer, Elliot Blair Smith, Is aware that the sale of unregistered shares are covered under the securities act of 1934 and that through rule 144 the sale of these shares is legal. Now I didnt get into this issue until Jan 98 but I was told by Joe LaStella that all the shares held by insiders were available to sell(that means they have cleared the 2 year waiting period required in rule 144). It wont look good if the "insiders" were selling all they had into the Jan-feb 98 rally. But in case the USA Today does not know lots of companies raise capital by selling stock. This will be ugly on tuesday. Difficult to say how low it will go? Anybody? We can ask ourselves this: How many of us will be willing to buy baat at fridays closing price? How many are going to sell at the open? How many will buy on the initial dip? Wish I knew how long an investigation of this sort took?

To: Gutterball who wrote (1818)	2/16/1998 11:44:00 AM
From: TheAlaskan	Respond to of 6464

Dan's certainties The technology vs. its patentability is an uncertainty. The SEC is not qualified to determine if the technology is patentable. They will obviously want to make sure that this is not just a mere fuel additive, but they will defer to the US Patent Office on the issue of patentability. You assert that the technology may not be theirs. On what basis do you make this claim. I have not seen any automaker or engine builder claim that BAAT has stolen technology. I do know that your company Net Effects has several automotive clients. Are you making this assertion based on information or a strategy revealed by one of your clients? If I am wrong on your relationship with the automotive industry, please categorically deny that you have a relationship with any direct competitor or possible buyer/user of this technology. Does Net Effects still have Ford Motor Company as a client? Your previous posts allude that yourself or a friend was at the track on Feb. 10th. You tell me if the engine did not produce 95 mpg. The mileage figure reported independently from BAAT is a certainty. SEC. You assume that the outcome will be negative. That may or may not be the result. It definately adds to the uncertainty. The SEC shutting down a compliant company may or may not come to fruition. I think it will depend on what the SEC finds. The downside risk is great. They are looking at 46 areas. Patents. I do not think that BAAT would be well advised not to file for international patents. Do they not own international patents on their battery technology? I find your assertion that they won't file international patents because they failed to mention it ridiculous. The filing of a patent in the US does not give protection overseas. In fact, each nation has its own rules and regulations on what constitutes patentability. Filing for international patents takes some strategy because actions to protect oneself in one country may actually harm yourself in another. The US Patent Office does not have the same rules for EU or Japan. The filing for an international patent should not be prosecuted hastily and takes a good patent law firm. In addition, once the patent is filed internationally, the Big three and other major automakers will gain access to the information from foreign patent offices that do not have the same controls on confidentiality ( another strategy issue) . All a patent does is give you a right to litigate those that infringe on the patent claims. The battalion of Ford or GM patent attorneys (on retainer) would clobber BAAT's financial resources at this juncture if BAAT was to litigate in a patent dispute. These problems are in addition to the patentability of the technology and they add to the uncertainty of the risk associated with BAAT. It is premature to assume that they are not aware of the international implications. Dan, please do not skirt my questions regarding your relationship with past or current automotive clients. Your information in your posts has been informative and for the most part interesting. However, I think you owe it to the readers of this thread to know if you are paid by others for your opinions. The Alaskan