Posted On: 08/08/2014 5:16:14 PM
Post# of 43065
Re: Commando911 #11974
I haven't been to the plant but I do know pyrolysis does work. It works on a number of materials. When you see the flame above a burning log in the fireplace, the reason there's a flame is because the heat breaks down the wood into a gas and that gas rises, mixes with oxygen and burns to emit light. By heating material in an oxygen-free container, those unburnt gasses can be collected and condensed as an oil.
To your point about the claims being exaggerated, you can see how people invested based on the thought of turning waste into crude oil or diesel at massive margins. Mr. Bordynuik represented that the $10/bbl cost and WTI-$3/bbl were the results he was seeing out of testing pyrolysis with his catalyst. If it wasn't deception then it was gross negligence. In my opinion, Mr. Bordynuik is a swindler but the alternative is that he's just grossly stupid.
There's also a distinction between already having a process which makes $10/bbl oil worth WTI-$3/bbl...and *working toward* developing a process which is hoped to be able to achieve those claims. Mr. Bordynuik clearly represented the former done-deal scenario at the beginning. He never said he was developing the catalyst and process and hoped to make it for under $10/bbl loaded up with costs and that he hoped to get an offer for WTI-$3/bbl for the output.
Additionally, the problem with the SEC filings is they're always written to keep the notion of Mr. Bordynuik's original claims alive and never admit the numbers are fake. Whether stated delays are cause by weather, costs are out of line high by paying too much for HTF, plants are shut down due to breakage or bad feedstock, there is always the suggestion that the claims are true but that other problems halted production. That's where I still have an issue. If Mr. Heddle came out and said they've found no way to make the process profitable but hoped to work toward it, I wouldn't have an issue with Mr. Heddle anymore. At that point at least everything is on the table and investors can then decide if they want to invest in Mr. Bordynuik's ability to tinkerfark.
My personal belief about processor sales is it's just another red herring in a long string of red herrings. Step one would be to fully disclose to shareholders what exactly goes into the processor at what price and whether or not the output is actually more valuable than the input. Currently any results of the process are simply withheld from shareholders. If it were established that the process is worthwhile, only then should processor sales be pursued. Or at least Mr. Heddle and Mr. Bordynuik should let shareholders know that no way to profitability was found but they're throwing a hail mary pass in the hopes some customer might find it valuable--that way shareholders would know what they're up against.
.
To your point about the claims being exaggerated, you can see how people invested based on the thought of turning waste into crude oil or diesel at massive margins. Mr. Bordynuik represented that the $10/bbl cost and WTI-$3/bbl were the results he was seeing out of testing pyrolysis with his catalyst. If it wasn't deception then it was gross negligence. In my opinion, Mr. Bordynuik is a swindler but the alternative is that he's just grossly stupid.
There's also a distinction between already having a process which makes $10/bbl oil worth WTI-$3/bbl...and *working toward* developing a process which is hoped to be able to achieve those claims. Mr. Bordynuik clearly represented the former done-deal scenario at the beginning. He never said he was developing the catalyst and process and hoped to make it for under $10/bbl loaded up with costs and that he hoped to get an offer for WTI-$3/bbl for the output.
Additionally, the problem with the SEC filings is they're always written to keep the notion of Mr. Bordynuik's original claims alive and never admit the numbers are fake. Whether stated delays are cause by weather, costs are out of line high by paying too much for HTF, plants are shut down due to breakage or bad feedstock, there is always the suggestion that the claims are true but that other problems halted production. That's where I still have an issue. If Mr. Heddle came out and said they've found no way to make the process profitable but hoped to work toward it, I wouldn't have an issue with Mr. Heddle anymore. At that point at least everything is on the table and investors can then decide if they want to invest in Mr. Bordynuik's ability to tinkerfark.
My personal belief about processor sales is it's just another red herring in a long string of red herrings. Step one would be to fully disclose to shareholders what exactly goes into the processor at what price and whether or not the output is actually more valuable than the input. Currently any results of the process are simply withheld from shareholders. If it were established that the process is worthwhile, only then should processor sales be pursued. Or at least Mr. Heddle and Mr. Bordynuik should let shareholders know that no way to profitability was found but they're throwing a hail mary pass in the hopes some customer might find it valuable--that way shareholders would know what they're up against.
.
(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 ▼
