Quote:

---

Where you fall short in your analysis is that if the secret catalyst really is good enough to allow "competition" to outperform PTOI...then it means that PTOI's processors are nothing special. In that case the best strategy is exactly as Heptocloud suggested--to license the catalyst at a price reflecting the value it provides.

---

I tried to be careful how I worded my reply, because I know that I am in the presence of professional wordsmiths.

I never suggested that the catalyst would allow the competition to outperform PTOI - rather, I stated that the catalyst is one of several advantages that PTOI has over the competition, suggesting that to hand over competitive advantages would allow the competition to get closer to PTOI, not to surpass it. I believe that PTOI's processors (and accompanying IP) have advantages over the competition above and beyond the catalyst, and that they are indeed "something special".

Your belief that my analysis falls short merely illustrates a difference of opinion, not a matter of "right" or "wrong". Licensing the catalyst for use by others is a non-strategic, non-starter at this time. Not sure if it ever would be.

Quote:

---

However I would strongly urge investors to demand some sort of evidence from the company that the catalyst or processors provide some value add before putting in any money. So far the company has provided no evidence and the original claims by Mr. Bordynuik were flat out fake. When you invest with a swindler, odds are that person will continue to try to swindle you.

---

This is your constant refrain: coupled with numbers from years ago, and current pricing for materials and commodities, you chirp incessantly about how the whole business is a failure because they cannot meet your metrics - as if your metrics were the only legitimate gauge of what end users of PTOI processors should be looking for. I have rarely seen such arrogance, and when I have, it is rarely accompanied by intellectual honesty.

Furthermore, such narrowly defined expectations completely ignore the very real possibility that PTOI processors, if placed at the sites where these plastic waste streams are produced / retrieved, would be considered an extraordinary asset by taking such waste streams and converting them into spec grade fuel, even if the uptimes and throughputs were a fraction of what has been claimed publicly. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that possibility (or a host of other possible uses) is very telling indeed; but I will credit you for being consistent in your disparagement of both the company and its employees....That hasn't changed since you began years ago.

As previously stated:

One way or another, this story will end, and some here have placed their bets that they're on the right side of it. At least they have the balls to "have skin in the game".