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 : Ballard Power -world leader zero-emission PEM fuel cells -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkeye who wrote (2550)	5/10/1998 12:51:00 AM
From: Thomas Stewart	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5827

No, Hawkeye, I could not. That diatribe was the work of some mean hosehead named Katlyn Wellington or something. I guess I missed a quotation at the beginning of that nonsense (there were, however, other clues that I was quoting!). Anyway, sorry 'bout the confusion--admittedly it was confusing. Please re-read in light of the fact that I was quoting from and disagreeing with the article that appeared in Barron's and first pointed out by Bob. Long on BLD!

To: Hawkeye who wrote (2550)	5/10/1998 7:44:00 AM
From: Sid Turtlman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5827

Hawkeye: "...could you provide a summary of the proprietary and patent positions of the major competitors to BLD? Power densities of their fuel cells?" These are good questions, but lack a context. Even if you knew the numbers and data, it wouldn't answer the bigger question of whether Daimler and others will be able to solve the huge technical and economic hurdles and be able to produce a commercial vehicle by 2004 that anyone would want to buy. I might add that many Ballard fans keep talking about the power density spec, as if that were the only number that counts. It does count, since it relates to how small the engine can be and still deliver the required power. But there is a lot more to consider than just the size of the fuel cell itself. For example, in the NECAR3 the reformer (the small chemical factory that extracts the hydrogen from the methanol fuel) evidently took up a good chunk of back seat area; that has to be shrunk as well. And there are numerous other specs to consider. Efficiency and the cost of the required fuel are important. Ballard's design is fairly efficient, but not so much so that a buyer will necessarily save any money, since the fuel it needs, methanol or hydrogen, cost twice and four times as much as gasoline, respectively, relative to the energy they contain. Contrast that to a gas/electric hybrid like the Toyota Prius, which gets 66 mpg on gasoline. And the Prius is a real car for sale today in Japan, not a paper car that has great specs because it doesn't exist yet.. One other thing in your post worth commenting on: "None of the stock reports I have read indicated anything other than a slow ramp up to full production over several years, not overnight success." That is true, but the stock doesn't have a $3 billion market cap because of considered, thoughtful analysis of its prospects. If people REALLY believed that it would be many years after introduction of the cars that they would attain critical mass and profitability, and that the Ballard's first profits would be unlikely to show up before 2007 at best, then the stock would probably be selling at one fifth the current price, if that. No, I would guess that a huge percentage of the people buying and holding Ballard stock figure that there are no technical or economic problems to solve, the chances of the cars actually being produced on schedule are 100%, that when they are introduced everyone will be clamoring to buy them, the other car companies will be begging for fuel cells so they can make them too, that Ballard will be the Intel/Microsoft of the next century, etc., etc. The stock is priced on fantasy and wishful thinking, not anything that resembles investment analysis. I think many reading the Barron's article will be surprised to discover that some people think that the dream scenario has slim chance of happening, and that there may be some risk that Daimler, with bigger fish to fry now, may put this whole project on the back burner next year.