"PP Just how much money should it take to bring th
Post# of 43066
Posted On: 11/08/2014 10:27:17 AM
"PP Just how much money should it take to bring this project from start to completion??"
- Kugel
The correct path would have been for Mr. Bordynuik to provide a proof of concept. That would have been for him to set up and run a processor to show investors and clients that he wasn't lying about his claims of 115 bbl/day of oil produced at a cost of under $10/bbl and being sold for near WTI. According to Mr. Bordynuik's early claims, that should have cost $80,000 for the processor.
What makes this trickier is that Mr. Bordynuik, according to him, did provide a fully tested proof of concept with that commercial processor and, after a few self-inflicted delays, told investors he was running the processor in full commercial production starting Dec 2010. Had he been honest, the next step would have been simply to replicate that wild success and keep buying and deploying $80,000 processors as each processor would have cleared $10,000/day.
However after falling silent and letting his fictional press release of "commercial operations" drive the stock for most of 2011, in November 2011 Mr. Bordynuik announced that he wasn't replicating his success...and instead said that he took the golden goose offline for most of 2011 in order to "enhance" it to reduce the footprint and double the output. The sharper people will immediately recognize that a second processor should also have doubled the output. Running two processors each clearing $10,000/day or $7.2M per year should have provided substantial cash flow.
Those investors who bought into Mr. Bordynuik's story that the $80,000 processor capable of clearing $3.6M per year should smartly be taken off line to be 'enhanced', found themselves with a much lighter wallet.
So how much 'should' it cost??...it should have already been done. How much more will it cost to keep operations going until the company can sell a processor at a profit even though none of the three processors were ever shown to run in a commercially viable fashion??...I personally don't think there's enough money out there.
The better way to approach this is to simply ask the company what obstacles still stand in the way before any processor can be put into full, profitable production, or if you're not committed to the new business plan, what hurdles need to be overcome before a profitable processor sale can be made. As you know, it doesn't matter how much I think it should cost.
.
- Kugel
The correct path would have been for Mr. Bordynuik to provide a proof of concept. That would have been for him to set up and run a processor to show investors and clients that he wasn't lying about his claims of 115 bbl/day of oil produced at a cost of under $10/bbl and being sold for near WTI. According to Mr. Bordynuik's early claims, that should have cost $80,000 for the processor.
What makes this trickier is that Mr. Bordynuik, according to him, did provide a fully tested proof of concept with that commercial processor and, after a few self-inflicted delays, told investors he was running the processor in full commercial production starting Dec 2010. Had he been honest, the next step would have been simply to replicate that wild success and keep buying and deploying $80,000 processors as each processor would have cleared $10,000/day.
However after falling silent and letting his fictional press release of "commercial operations" drive the stock for most of 2011, in November 2011 Mr. Bordynuik announced that he wasn't replicating his success...and instead said that he took the golden goose offline for most of 2011 in order to "enhance" it to reduce the footprint and double the output. The sharper people will immediately recognize that a second processor should also have doubled the output. Running two processors each clearing $10,000/day or $7.2M per year should have provided substantial cash flow.
Those investors who bought into Mr. Bordynuik's story that the $80,000 processor capable of clearing $3.6M per year should smartly be taken off line to be 'enhanced', found themselves with a much lighter wallet.
So how much 'should' it cost??...it should have already been done. How much more will it cost to keep operations going until the company can sell a processor at a profit even though none of the three processors were ever shown to run in a commercially viable fashion??...I personally don't think there's enough money out there.
The better way to approach this is to simply ask the company what obstacles still stand in the way before any processor can be put into full, profitable production, or if you're not committed to the new business plan, what hurdles need to be overcome before a profitable processor sale can be made. As you know, it doesn't matter how much I think it should cost.
.
(0)
(0)Plastic2Oil, Inc. (PTOI) Stock Research Links
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.