Posted On: 05/09/2014 9:14:07 AM
Post# of 43065
Well, there's no evidence of any type of successful proof of concept showing any type of feedstock can be turned into anything more valuable. That should have been done in 2009 and Mr. Bordynuik certainly implied it had been done....
He's used investor money to build a 1-ton to 'prove' it scaled and a commercial unit and announced commercial operations to communicate to shareholders that he found the process created value. Then two more units.
Now he's into trying processor sales, taking investment to pay himself and show 'progress' all the way.
...and yet any proof that the pyrolysis creates value is non-existent.
The SAIC audit...lives in this dual state of JBI publicly saying it shouldn't be relied upon while message board posters keep citing it as evidence. The assumptions are undisclosed and over two years later, JBI still isn't producing anything of value. One should wonder why SAIC was hired to rely on assumptions in the first place when JBI already had real, non-hypothetical data at that time.
Since you rely on SAIC despite all that, why do you think JBI isn't implementing that scenario used in SAIC's analysis which supposedly made it highly profitable, over two years after the analysis?? Do they now need another SAIC hypothetical-rich analysis to 'prove' it can be profitable at customer site??
He's used investor money to build a 1-ton to 'prove' it scaled and a commercial unit and announced commercial operations to communicate to shareholders that he found the process created value. Then two more units.
Now he's into trying processor sales, taking investment to pay himself and show 'progress' all the way.
...and yet any proof that the pyrolysis creates value is non-existent.
The SAIC audit...lives in this dual state of JBI publicly saying it shouldn't be relied upon while message board posters keep citing it as evidence. The assumptions are undisclosed and over two years later, JBI still isn't producing anything of value. One should wonder why SAIC was hired to rely on assumptions in the first place when JBI already had real, non-hypothetical data at that time.
Since you rely on SAIC despite all that, why do you think JBI isn't implementing that scenario used in SAIC's analysis which supposedly made it highly profitable, over two years after the analysis?? Do they now need another SAIC hypothetical-rich analysis to 'prove' it can be profitable at customer site??
(0)
(0)
Yes, I understand your penny stock also is the real deal, created with the inventiveness of Edison and destined to be the next Microsoft. Yes, I understand that the delays are also only because your company is making their product and/or technology even more revolutionary.
Scroll down for more posts ▼
