Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
If I Recall Correctly. It means "If I Recall Correctly".
Thanks. Any idea what triggers the timing of rebalancing? Is there any predictability to it?
Was CYTR one of them? Any ideas on how that rebalancing process affects the stock(s) moving forward? Or any idea how to tell if the rebalancing added or removed shares from the current public float in any real quantity?
This looks real interesting:
http://www.intactnutrition.com/clinical-data
Any idea if and when we might get some official news?
What gave you that impression?
IIRC they did a stock split (2 shares for 1 old share), and I suspect that some old investors wanted to cash out (or partly cash out) after the 28 million dollar sale was announced, about 18 months ago now (maybe 12 months?), so they did the promo to get the news out on the 28 million dollar sale to get new investors interested in buying. It is also possible that some of those that cashed out, are now loaning the company money today since the new well looks like a huge hit. But much of that is just guess work on my part.
Hmm, who were the other 15?
DM, I think we all get a little off track (or frisky) at times when emotions about our pet investments and money get stirred up. I deleted a bunch of posts today because they were heading for a 4 way flame war. Ihub policy says to also delete posts that reply to the personal attack posts, but I sometimes have trouble doing that if the reply is calmly worded and does not respond to the prior attack with a counter attack, so at times there are gray areas. I had asked Ihub staff to help me figure out what to do with a few of those posts, that is why they PM'd you, as one of yours had hit the boarder line for me, and I was not even sure what to do. It was also a reply to a post I deleted, and I hub policy called for it to also be deleted, so I asked them review all the posts (even the ones I deleted).
All in all, I think you have done a real good job for the most part as a poster here and as an assistant trying to keep the peace, since our first tussle and chat with Ihub over policy a few months back. So consider this a pat on the back!!!
I have personally seen a huge difference between posts at Ihub, and Yahoo and Seeking Alpha lately, the huge difference being a lack of flame wars here, and a lack of floods of off topic posts, that just annoy people who are busy, but want to read others intelligent thoughts on a stock, and not a bunch of flame war posts and off topic junk posts. I have even seem some people defect from Yahoo lately and join some of the boards I moderate with compliments about Ihub's policy, and how much better it is here than at Yahoo. The difference being I guess that Yahoo is a free for all, with little or no rules.
So for the others here, lets please try and keep our personal feelings about each other, or each others posts or opinions to ourselves, and discuss just the topic at hand, which is Carbon Sciences and any news related to their future. If someone posts a personal attack, please do not reply to it, as it will be deleted when I first see it.
For the CABND bulls that may be new here (and thus do not know me), please keep in mind that I was a huge CABN bull cheerleader here for 2 years before I turned recently bearish. I was the one here who was explaining the complex chemical reaction engineering behind what CABN was trying to do, for those who feared it might be a perpetual motion scam. For now I am short term bearish (for reasons I have already explained), and I have reserved long term judgment for another 6 months or so, till we know more than we know today.
Have a nice weekend!
Cost comparisons and performance comparison tests by third parties would mean a lot at this time, and in this space.
Since it seems that the drillers are using different chemical soup mixes, what is cost effective with good performance may vary from site to site and driller to driller, depending on their favorite Muds and Fracking blends.
If this outfit has something really new and valuable, we might look for a big buyer someday? Someone that maintains a large rental fleet of O&G equipment perhaps?
I am still watching this one from the sidelines.
SEC filing out. They canned the independent audit accounting firm.
http://secwatch.com/anx/8k/events-or-changes-between-quar/2011/6/23/8899972?full=true
You are confusing apples and oranges, there is absolutely no connection.
The Sequestraion was for converting CO2 into a solid mineral, patent attempt number one. Failed, abandoned.
The Encapsulation was to protect an organic enzyme from de-activation by contaminates in the CO2 flue gases (patent number 2, idea number 2, inventor #2, for the organic enzyme approach to convert CO2 & water into Methanol... then convert methanol into a long chain liquid fuel like gasoline). Patent idea / approach number three (inventor #3, the Shell engineer perhaps?) was using CO2 plus methane to make a syngas to feed to a FT process to make gasoline / diesel fuel by piggy backing onto the Fisher Tropsh (FT) process from WWII Germany.
------------------------------------------
Note to the entire group here:
I have little patience for personal attacks by anyone, on anyone here. Ihub has even less patience than I do! I will not allow personal attack posts here, no matter how slight, or cleverly disguised, or well they are written, as they only trigger an escalating flame war, and distract us from the real topic, and drive away people who want help getting quick easy answers to real questions.
Lets stick to the real topic here, which is not about other posters, each other, or their motives, or reasoning paths, or their trading skills, etc.
I recall finding, or seeing that PR about 2 years ago, but I just tried every possible combination here:
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3h3cz9XEzcPIwMLvyALA08jF39LE2cjQwMLU6B8JG55dxNKdBuYEtAdDnItftvxyYPMB8kb4ACOBvp-Hvm5qfqR-lHmCFPcff3dgKa4ebh5BxgZG7gb6UfmpKYnJlfqF-SGRhhkBmQEOioqAgBVda8T/dl3/d3/L0lJSklna21DU1EhIS9JRGpBQU15QUJFUkNKRXFnLzRGR2dzbzBWdnphOUlBOW9JQSEhLzdfRzdORTRGSDIwR01PRjBJMkZIRktQMjMwRzIvMHpIV3M4MDA4MDA0NC9zYS5nZXRCaWI!/
After about 30 minutes I tried the number string with out the / in it and refound this one:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=20080277319&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PG01
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20080277319&OS=20080277319&RS=20080277319
No where does the it show Carbon Sciences' name on the application.
But I finally found this, after getting rid of / in the number string:
Application Number: 11/749,741 Customer Number: -
Filing or 371 (c) Date: 05-16-2007 Status: Abandoned -- Failure to Respond to an Office Action
Application Type: Utility Status Date: 10-09-2009
Examiner Name: BERNS, DANIEL J Location: What is a Location? ELECTRONIC
Group Art Unit: 1793 Location Date: -
Confirmation Number: 8777 Earliest Publication No: US 2008-0277319 A1
Attorney Docket Number: CARB.02.02 Earliest Publication Date: 11-13-2008
Class / Subclass: 423/225 Patent Number: -
First Named Inventor: Michael D. Wyrsta , Santa Barbara, CA (US) Issue Date of Patent: -
This link may not work, as it it requires a security log in to get to the search page, but try it anyway:
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3h3cz9XEzcPIwMLvyALA08jF39LE2cjQwMLU6B8JG55dxNKdBuYEtAdDnItftvxyYPMB8kb4ACOBvp-Hvm5qfqR-lHmCFPcff3dgKa4ebh5BxgZG7gb6UfmpKYnJlfqF-SGRhhkBmQEOioqAgBVda8T/dl3/d3/L0lJSklna21DU1EhIS9JRGpBQU15QUJFUkNKRXFnLzRGR2dzbzBWdnphOUlBOW9JQSEhLzdfRzdORTRGSDIwR01PRjBJMkZIRktQMjMwRzIvQTdrNVQ0MTUyMDAwOC9zYS5nZXRCaWI!/
Transaction History:
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3h3cz9XEzcPIwMLvyALA08jF39LE2cjQwMLU6B8JG55dxNKdBuYEtAdDnItftvxyYPMB8kb4ACOBvp-Hvm5qfqR-lHmCFPcff3dgKa4ebh5BxgZG7gb6UfmpKYnJlfqF-SGRhhkBmQEOioqAgBVda8T/dl3/d3/L0lJSklna21DU1EhIS9JRGpBQU15QUJFUkNKRXFnLzRGR2dzbzBWdnphOUlBOW9JQSEhLzdfRzdORTRGSDIwR01PRjBJMkZIRktQMjMwRzIvXzdrNVQ0MTUyMDAxNi9zYS5nZXRCaWI!/
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3h3cz9XEzcPIwMLvyALA08jF39LE2cjQwMLU6B8JG55dxNKdBuYEtAdDnItftvxyYPMB8kb4ACOBvp-Hvm5qfqR-lHmCFPcff3dgKa4ebh5BxgZG7gb6UfmpKYnJlfqF-SGRhhkBmQEOioqAgBVda8T/dl3/d3/L0lJSklna21DU1EhIS9JRGpBQU15QUJFUkNKRXFnLzRGR2dzbzBWdnphOUlBOW9JQSEhLzdfRzdORTRGSDIwR01PRjBJMkZIRktQMjMwRzIvbXBjcTEzMTkyMDAzMi9zYS5nZXRCaWI!/
Be sure and take a look at the 17 page non-final rejection letter (PDF), for a great example of a very poorly worded patent application!!! Ye GADs!!!!
dayneyus,
The encapsulation technology was for the organic enzyme based catalyst to make methanol out of CO2 and water. It was the invention of the prior chemical engineer that has left CS. That technology has been shelved according to Byron, and possibly abandoned in the future as they are no longer pursuing that path.
Good question Optimus917.
If the patent was only good (or initially filed only) in Canada the answer would be yes. If the patent was a PCT application and later entered the national phase in the USA it would show up in the USA, but not under Carbon Sciences name until it was at some point assigned to Carbon Sciences. If Carbon Sciences did a simple license deal, with no transfer of ownership (patent assignment), to Carbon Sciences then it would be as you said, listed with the University as the AN, and the inventors as the inventors.
So you are probably right about that patent. Problem is CS has not disclosed which patents (or patent applications?), they have cut a deal on with the Canadian University, so we have zero transparency there as well. Also a Canadian patent is not enforceable in the USA, and we have no visibility regarding which countries the Canadian patent applies to or its status in the world patent offices (such as applied for, examined, issued, if issued how old is it already?) But what about the other patents CS claimed they filed for? Have they been abandoned?
So here is the deal. Carbon sciences has claimed to have filed previous patent applications of their own, but none that I can find have ever gotten to the published stage which is required before they can reach the examining stage. So we currently have no transparency on any of the Carbon Sciences own patent IP status.
Assuming that Carbon Sciences still has a license deal for a catalyst with the Canadian University, CS has not posted to the SEC the terms of that license, which I think the SEC would consider to be required, requiring an 8-K submittal of the details, copy of the text, and signatures, of the actual license since it is so important to the current value of CS right now? So we have zero transparency on the terms of the license deal, which is NOT good! Especially if it is the key cog in the technology wheel, which is also not clear right now. We have no idea if the license has any nasty non performance triggers that would void the deal, any huge payment fees and dates that may be very costly to shareholders, or cost prohibitive license terms for JV partners, etc.
What I fear is that we are starting to see a pattern here, a "oh look at the cute kitty over there" syndrome. I hope I am wrong, but until CS is more forthcoming with hard facts and details, serious investors are going to continue to side step this one.
http://secwatch.com/converted-organics-inc/s1/ipo-registration/2011/6/24/8902240?full=true
That may be old news, registering previously restricted shares from the Terra stockholder merger?
That MACD divergence the last 4 months in your chart says this is a screaming buy, with a target at $2-3!!!!!
There is also a HUGE gap still to cover back at $2!!!!!! Sure glad I held my shares now!
Very interesting close today!!!! 26 million shares traded, 50 times the normal daily volume, and it all showed up the close? Something is up!!!!!
Did the shorts cover?
Well I bought more today, and placed a larger order down near .005 now that we have gotten that low, but it has not filled yet.
I suspect there may be good news coming and someone is trying to grab cheap shares (LOL, I know I am, LOL, trying to grab cheap shares that is), and it is nice the see the liquidity returning to a steady pace which should help in the long run.
With all the debt being cleared out (converted to shares), and pending R/S to take us up to just under $1, and several promising products in the pipeline, I think this one can be a 3-4 bager easy, or a 10 bager from the .005 price.
But I have had to wait as long as 12 months before here to get the big move up to cash out on. In other words, if you average down, it may be 6 months before this beast rallies way up, unless it is getting ready to rally this next week?
I don't see much if any down side buying this one at .005 to .01
One thing I have learned here is to buy the high volume sell off, new all time lows on this one, then wait for months if needed for it run up up and away!
I think the company's prospects are much better right now than they have been for 3 years!
Houston we have lift off!!!!
Best 48 hour stock return I have had yet. YET!!!
LOL
I am wondering if the paint has dried here yet? Nothing more fascinating to watch than drying paint!
This (CO2 emissions trading in the EU) was in the news today"
I am wondering what happened to out friend (poster) Captain Canada?
Today's closing volume on ABAT shares was off the charts with a roughly 5.5 million share spike in the last 3 minutes of trade, with little price change (went from 1.04 to 1.09 then 1.07).
That means an MM or MM/broker was buying (or selling?) all day for a huge single order for somebody. Since the price was nearly flat on the day tell the close, I think it might have been a huge short that covered today. But it could have been a new short selling all the rally attempts in anticipation of a new short seller article this weekend?
Last data I have showed 10% of the shares in institutional hands, with 42% owned by the ABAT CEO, and 10% of OS shares were short, leaving only 38% to cover shorts. The OS is about 92 million shares, so a 7+ million share day, with 5.5 million of those shares posted as traded at the close, means something big just happened, or is about to happen here!
Note that the 5.5 million share spike happened (or was posted) in the last 3 minutes, and the price jumped from 1.04 to 1.09/share with the first 1/2 million shares posted 3 minutes before the market closed.
Earlier PRs in December said they had licensed a catalyst from the Canadian University. There was no mention of licensing a "component" in the December PRs.
I am still trying to figure out just what a commercial facility is:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64562068
http://www.google.com/search?q=define+commercial+facility&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=sNe&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=Commercial+facility&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=OBQETurND8uSgQe9iJHaDQ&ved=0CBoQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=68c0ff49d7f8fcb6&biw=1280&bih=587
According to the US DOT:
Commercial facility - Facilities that are intended for nonresidential use by private entities and whose operation affects commerce.
Here is the other catchy fluff phrase:
"commercial performance testing"
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=64562068
NDAs, and signing NDAs is a routine practice. Ask any patent attorney or patent agent. I have used them for over 25 years. Carbon Sciences would require the signature on a NDA before disclosing anything of substance, not already protected by a patent application, to a potential JV partner or a large accredited investor. No potential large investor or JV partner or customer would consider any kind of deal or exchange of cash or agreements with out first signing NDAs, and then examining what CS actually has applied for patent wise, or has or believes they have as a trade secret.
Read up here and learn something new:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreement
Limit orders can and typically are filled by MMs from inventory at higher or lower prices than what you see on level II. We never see the limit orders.
You did not do the search right. Use this page:
http://appft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.html
Then list:
AN/(carbon and sciences)
as the search string. That tells the search engine you want only patent applications where the words "carbon" and "sciences" are in the Assignees Name (AN). Meaning you want only patent applications that were assigned to "Carbon Sciences" as the owner.
This searches for published US patent applications. If they have a provisional application, which they have not published, it must be converted to a non provisional with in 365 days (and then published on the USPTO schedule), or it gets tossed out, and they loose the priority filing date.
These guys have been around long enough that I would have expected to find something at least from the stuff they were doing 3-4 years ago, or even 2 years ago or 18 months ago, published by now as an application at the US PTO.
I asked Byron 12 months ago if he would supply me a copy of the current unpublished patent application(s) that he claimed had been filed, and offered to sign a non-disclosure agreement, and he never replied to my written request.
I just rechecked the US PTO office data base, and I can not find a single patent application assigned to CABN!
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=AN%2F%28carbon+and+sciences%29&d=PG01
People try to trip stop loss sell orders by banging the low bids on a day like today, when people get scared and the bids fall away. I crunched the numbers today and 95% of the shares were traded today between .18 and .19/share. Could also have been an MM grabbing stop loss shares for the next rally to sell. I hope it was not your shares they stole?
We should be banging on the .20 door tomorrow with a little luck, now that the Greece scare has been kicked down the road a ways. Suddenly with oil on its way back to reasonable levels (The world wide and US SPR is releasing, selling oil, in the news today), and Greece in the bag, this summer is no longer looking like a possible 08-90 crash!!!!!
I agree, I was just redoing some charts and at the moment I see an expanding triangle, with us near a 3 year low that may be the triangle target as well as a double bottom target at the same time. Wish I had dry powder to spare to add here. My average cost is $1.2, been in this one since 2009.
Lot of shorts on this one, that may cover going into end of the month window dressing, they may be driving it down here so they can cover? Volume is below average.
I agree it should bounce a good bit pretty soon. I see no fundamental reason for the drop, other than market jitters.
I did not see the AS increase news? But if they did sell new shares, these guys will push it to $2 before they sell new shares, just like they did with RXII!!!! I don't see any reason for them to sell new shares here. They have plenty of cash already.
Serious signs of life here!!!!! Go YRCW
That chart is not brand new, and it already showed about 1600 hours of testing.
It is not at all clear what the latest test data PRs are referring to, the first or second generation catalyst? And all that link does is make it less clear. I had forgotten their mention of a second generation catalyst, but now I recall it was one of the reasons I was asking questions last time, who is first, what is second, and I don't know is on third. Have they said anything else about it, naming it specifically as the second generation catalyst, where they said anything more than "near perfect catalyst", anything more than "reaching the theoretical yield"?
Now you have me wondering what the 1000 hour commercial and 2000 hour lab tests were testing, Cat #1 or Cat #2, or dor number 3, and is Cat #2 the Canadian University licensed cat, or a new one they plan to write a new patent application for?
Byron was legally obligated to disclose that November news that their attorneys had discovered prior art that made the November catalyst un-patentable, or risk getting nailed by the SEC and stockholder lawsuits for withholding it. It was the kind of information they could be sued for not immediately disclosing.
The other grey (not good news, possibly bad news) news (what I was referring to when I said bad news that he is not giving full disclosure on), he continues to sit on is what I am referring to.
Another poster said I was wrong about 2000 hours of catalyst tests already being done. He is wrong, I am right. CABN already completed, and announced 2000 hours of lab testing of the catalyst was completed, lab testing meaning to any chemist or chemical engineer, that they ran the test with high purity CO2 and CH4 feeds. The current 1000 hours of additional complete testing is with the commercial, dirtier, less pure feeds like a commercial facility will need and want to use. It is too costly to totally purify the CO2 and CH-4 feed stock before feeding it to the reactor. The trick is to find a catalyst that is not quickly poisoned by those contaminates. Those contaminates will vary by compound and concentration from well to well, which further complicates commercialization!
There are catalysts that will already do dry reforming, but none of them have been economical yet. They had various problems, like poisoning from commercial contaminates that deactivated the catalyst.
I agree, if they in fact have an exclusive dry reforming catalyst that is patent protectable, or already patented and licensed to CABN, and if it is the best one the world knows of, then I agree they have a great world class technology, a possible game changer, but these guys have pulled the rug out from under us too many times already, shifted gears too many times in mid stream, for me to pay today's premium price for shares, when we still have so many unknowns that they have not written down in stone yet. So I will wait to re-invest as well.
I just do not see why Byron won't spell out exactly which catalyst they are testing? A new one, the old un-patentable one, or the Canadian University one? Why is he being so vague about this?
I have not forgotten the Panic sell off in November last year when Byron released the news that their great new catalyst was not patentable after all and everyone was running for cover. When that happened I held my shares, and told this group then that the party might not be over. I was the lone voice in the crowd then as everyone ran for the doors. And I was right then, as they signed a license deal with the Canadian university about 2 weeks later. Unfortunately they never told us what patent #(s) they licensed? They never told us if it was the same one they had re-discovered and run their own tests on, or a better one, or what? Just too many secrets right now for me to trust a group with the track record they have so far.
Why haven't they mentioned the Shell engineer for the last 7 months? He was the reason I stayed on board last year when I first thought about giving up this outfit.
Mark my words, the next 10-Q is very likely to show new shares sold at .80 to $1.60/share in the last 3 months!
And once the old shares are physically replaced with new ones, and somebody lends them to shorts, we will see a nasty dip here.
I sold the day it hit $6, the day the R/S happened.
I simply refuse to pay a premium for shares I know I will be able to buy much cheaper this summer, over the next 6 months.
CABN has repeatedly sold new shares to accredited investors for as much as 70% off of retail to keep the bills paid. When I first bought shares here, there we 90% fewer shares outstanding, and that was 2 years ago, and they said then they had the magic formula ( a process they have since abandoned, or shelved as they could not get a partner to sign on or get it funded, so they abandoned it), and they said then all they needed was a JV partner to fund a pilot plant. Now we are testing a new magic formula, with no idea for sure if it is the un-patentable one, or the Canadian University licensed one, or a third one they hope to patent?
A company like this can NOT support an infinite market cap, so as shares are added, the share price drops based on the markets view of the companies potential maximum market cap. The accredited investors that are buying the new shares at a discount, and selling you shares at a premium know this, that is why they keep buying new shares at a lower and lower price each time and then selling the old higher cost shares to you at a premium over what they paid.
If they try to build their own plants to produce fuel, it will take huge amounts of funding, and stock dilution to get there. If they license it, the revenue will be much smaller (as well as profits in $$s), and thus the target market cap will be much lower raising questions as to whether the current market cap is overvalued at the current share price times the current share count?
I have never called Byron a liar, but he is not telling the entire story (errors of omission), and by not telling the entire story, just telling us the good fluffy news, and not any of the bad news, he is leading investors like you to the slaughter house! If you don't mind further 50 to 80% hair cuts then by all means buy away here!!!! Buy the dream!
I have been around long enough and involved in enough start ups like this one, to know how long it takes, and how much it costs to get from point A to point B. 2 years ago, CABN made it sound like they were much further along than they really were, like they were already at Point X, much less B or C.
When I can see a real patent application in the patent offices, with claims that look like they will work, and performance data that will pass the economic tests, I will look at re-investing in this one.
Let me ask you a question. If they have 2000 hours of positive lab test data from ETF, why have they not published the ETF lab report to prove it is verifiable by the independent lab ETF?
Where is the Ex-Shell Oil engineer?
Note: Emerging Fuels Technology = ETF
Just want to make sure I have not confused you or others. From what I can gather they are running "commercial lab tests" at a reputable facility, namely ETF which they have named several times recently, but they are a lab, not a production facility, and thus are not doing lab-lab tests now, but are doing commercial feed stock lab tests in the lab. The difference is in the level of contamination in the feed stock.
What I do not believe they are running is a commercial pilot plant test at Commercial FT production site, in spite of the vague PR trying to make it sound like they are, to people who are not in the industry, and thus are less informed as to how this sort of thing works, and thus are easily miss led to the buying window!!!! That kind of trial/test would be the next step, and would require considerable additional costs out of somebodies pocket, and 3-6 months of design and construction work.
I hope you all are prepared to loose your *sses because I just bought the falling knife here this morning!
LOL
All I can tell you for sure is that I am buyer down here, and selling 1/2 at .04 if we get there anytime soon. I have ridden this one up 400 to 800% a couple of times since 2008. I have more MHAN shares now than I ever had, and average cost for me is about .02 now.
I am worried about the entire market right now, but today's oil news I think is going to be good long term. In spite of today's nasty sell off in the markets, I am doing OK today, which is encouraging.
China BAK Battery, Inc. ("China BAK" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CBAK), a leading global manufacturer of lithium-based battery cells, today announced that it was invited to attend the 2011 Ernst & Young Asia Cleantech Ignition Session in Beijing, on June 24, 2011, jointly hosted by the Ernst & Young Global Automotive Center, Global Power & Utilities Center and Global Cleantech Center.
The Global Automotive and Cleantech Centers co-host executive roundtables that convene key stakeholders across the electric vehicle (EV) value chain, including OEMs, suppliers, utilities and government, investors, consumer product companies and system integrators, focusing on the most important issues in the burgeoning cleantech market. For more information please visit: http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/roundtable_en/$FILE/Cleantech_Ignition_Session_Invitation_EN.pdf
Dr. Zhongyi Deng, China BAK's VP of Sales, will attend the session. "I look forward to sharing China BAK's EV battery supply experiences with the other attendees," commented Dr. Deng. "The Company has experienced strong interest from major vehicle manufacturers in the quality of its lithium-based batteries for electric vehicles. For example, China BAK's EV battery cells power a set of pure electric vehicles manufactured by Dongfeng-Yulon Motor Sales Co., Ltd., a joint venture between leading Taiwanese automaker Yulon Motor and Chinese automaker Dongfeng Automobile Co., Ltd. and delivered to the public transportation authority of the city of Hangzhou, China on June 17. At the same time, we think that one of the goals for the development of the EV industry is to find ways to reduce costs for all participants. I therefore look forward to discussing the Company's roadmap to attain this goal."
About China BAK Battery, Inc.
China BAK Battery, Inc. (NASDAQ: CBAK) is a leading global manufacturer of lithium-based battery cells. The Company produces battery cells that are the principal component of rechargeable batteries commonly used in cellular phones, notebook computers and portable consumer electronics such as digital media devices, portable media players, portable audio players, portable gaming devices, and PDAs. China BAK Battery, Inc.'s production facilities, located in Shenzhen and Tianjin, PRC, cover over three million square feet and have been recently expanded to support the production of larger batteries for various types of vehicles. For more information regarding China BAK Battery, Inc., please visit http://www.bak.com.cn.