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 : Energy Conversion Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Krowbar who wrote (2519)	10/23/1998 11:11:00 AM
From: WALT REISCH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8393

I agree with you Del that hybrids are the next car and/or bridge to EV's. I am not sure if I agree with Barbara Richardson and her comment about the mandate. "You can mandate that someone build the vehicles, but there's no mandate that says anyone has to buy them." If I am incorrect in my understanding, please correct me. I was under the impression that the mandate dealt with a percentage of sales, not a percentage of production? So in turn, someone would have to buy them. Again, correct me if I am wrong, but if the cost of the vehicle is to high, and no one buys them, will the auto manufactures be forced to lower their price and sell the required number of vehicles (per the mandate) at a lose? Does anyone know if the thin film being manufactured by Southwall is being used or can be used in the production of HDTV's? Walt

To: Krowbar who wrote (2519)	10/23/1998 10:03:00 PM
From: Michael Latas	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8393

Out of curiosity, does it really matter which vehicle initially is the most popular, EV's, or HEV's? Or will HEV's be first, or EV's? Really????? Either way, we stand to win. Both require advanced batteries. If HEV's outsell EV's so be it. Each HEV sold will replace an ICE vehicle. Isn't that the name of the game, even though the HEV will have a small ICE engine and a smaller battery pack. But it sure knocks out an ICE vehicle. This will help us in our revolution to overthrow the internal combustion vehicle industry. Furthermore, down the road even the fuel cell cars will require a fair sized battery pack. Doesn't that increase the overall market potential for an advanced battery? We need all of the help we can get to increase our battery production volume from whatever source we can. In the end all products are market driven. The superior technology will win out, regardless of what product or technology we are speaking about. I wouldn't argue the fact that the auto industry would rather see a very slow transitional step take place from the present internal combustion engine to an HEV, which will have a small ICE engine. It undoubtedly is more profitable to them, in particular when you include the profits derived from servicing these vehicles. However, as we continue to make improvements in our energy density to 110-120- 130 and upward, while our volume goes up and our costs go down, we will see a shift take place as people get accustomed to EV's. In particular, when gasoline prices continue to rise from these record low prices. It is simply a matter of time. And I'm not talking about ten or twenty years down the road. Gasoline prices throughout the world are considerably more expensive than the U.S., running more like four dollars or more per gallon at the present time and destined to go even higher. Is there anyone out there that disagrees on this? So in my humble opinion, we should all rejoice when we hear that HEV's are picking up steam. Personally I can't wait until we introduce our very first EV's into the marketplace with our "advanced" NiMH batteries at long last, followed by our HEV's down the road. This will be a true test of the technology we have. It should be interesting... Regards.