I'm guessing you didn't read the statement of changes of beneficial ownership? He unloaded roughly 250,000 shares from about 4/11 - 5/6

If you started your exploration at the beginning of April, and it is still ongoing, why are you unloading shares? I guess he have a lot of confidence. And that right there reduces my confidence

According to the 10Q released yesterday, it was already completed.

Never good to see the CEO unloading shares like Tim just did.

not cool

Here is a new article that I haven't seen. Doesn't say when the interview was done but it was just posted this week. Up to date info and answers a couple questions floating around out there. Byron gives internal goals as well as acknowledging that their over goal is to license their technology.

Here is the link: http://www.icis.com/blogs/green-chemicals/

Ecomike you might be on to something with this post. I did a little digging around and found the the law firm CABN elected to help with the R/S was nominated as the top firm for 2010 (again). Here is the link:

Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference LLP Recognized as America’s Number One PIPE Issuer Law Firm for 2010

http://www.srffllp.com/news_view.asp?langdisp=&id=87



Some of this is over my head, but I do know PIPE stands for Private Investment in Public Equities. Don't know what is going to come of this for CABN, but interesting anyway

Unless they follow this uplisting (assuming it actually happens) with some HUGE news, it will come crashing down in a hurry.

Yes this is true. I got the CABN email just a bit ago. Honestly, I kind of expected this at some point and understand why they want to do it. What I don't understand is why they want to do it now. There are no revenues coming in. They don't even know if their technology will work commercially. Nobody is going to invest at those prices in a company with no revenues.....that is what pennyland is for. Too bad. I see this back down under 50 cents within a month of the R/S....if not lower. I'm disappointed.

Did I read this correctly....LTHU has over 3 billion OS?

Ecomike:

I completely agree with your take on the "Upon completion of the testing phase, we will develop, optimize and produce a commercial form of the catalyst along with an integrated commercial process design" that was released in their latest PR. That absolutely sounds like more testing after the current testing, and something that will push back commercialization. Wasn't happy when I read that either.

However, I did want to point out that somehow, some way, UoS is still involved with CABN. They just overhauled their website like we all read. If you look at the strategic partners section, they do list UoS along with the recent addition of EFT. Here is the link: http://www.carbonsciences.com/01/about_partners.html

Thanks for the input everyone. It is appreciated

But isn't that exactly what they are trying to do now that they added Emerging Fuels Technology? ....get all the testing and verification completed for a potential JV?

I'm just saying, for me anyway, it feels like we are moving along and I can atually start to see some progress towards the light at the end of the tunnel

Just me though

In a follow up to my post yesterday, the more research I do on EFT the more I am thinking this could be the last step before finding a JV deal. Here is another link: http://emfuelstech.com/services/engineering-and-consulting-services/

Not knowing really anything about the technology or process, it seems like EMT will be able to provide them all the data they will need to see if this is actually going to work and be economical. On the flip side, could also find out that this is a bust and will not work on commercial scale.

It seems we have come to the crossroads with CABN and could potentially be at a defining moment for them. I've gotten a little excited since this PR.

Any thoughts? Am I way off base?

Thanks Ecomike, as always.

When I read this PR I had the exact same concerns as to what happened with the University of Saskatchewan. I went back to the PR that was released Dec 27, 2010 and in that PR was the following:


Byron Elton, CEO of Carbon Sciences, said, "We are excited about our license agreement with the University of Saskatchewan as it eliminates a big hurdle in our development plan. We look forward to demonstrating on a larger scale, the commercial viability of this important breakthrough and moving closer to our ultimate goal of producing gasoline and other portable fuels using greenhouse gases."

"The University of Saskatchewan has been on the forefront of green technology development for quite some time and partnering with the private sector to commercialize their work is a key part of their strategy," Elton added. "We are confident that the synergy between their technology and Carbon Sciences' technical and corporate strengths will make for a very successfully partnership, and move the world closer to significantly reducing the use of petroleum as the primary source of transportation fuels."


This new PR did make it come across as University of Saskatchewan was no longer in the picture at first, but I think they are still in the picture. I don't think Carbon partnered with the University of Saskatchewan to provided commercial testing, but rather to side-step the need to go back to the drawing board to come up with a new cataylyst design that is not already pattened. I took it as being these two partnered together just so Carbon can use their technology in conjuction with there own to speed this process up.

The last sentence of the the PR released last night states:

"Carbon Sciences' proprietary catalyst is extremely robust and has been proven to work continuously over more than 2,000 hours in laboratory testing."

These hours of testing is something they didn't have until they completed the license with UoS, which again I'm guessing means they just needed them for the license of their technology.

Now that they have the license with them, they brought Emerging Fuels Technology in to help prove the commercial viability of the catalyst. (something I'm guessing UoS couldn't do) Not sure who has looked at EFT's webpage, but here is the link: http://emfuelstech.com/

It looks like they not only preform testing of the catalysts, but also help engineer commercial plants for GTL. One of the projects EFT has been working on is set to start operations on the commercial plant in 2012.

I have all the patience in the world here! I'm in for the long haul

Is anybody else a little worried about CABN's rate of equity financing? From 4/2010 to 4/2011, they increased their OS by over 43,000,000....which represents roughly a 25% increase in OS in one year.

I understand they need the $ to fund operational, administrative, marketing, technology, etc..., but that seems a little extreme.

Don't get me wrong, always been a big supporter and believer in CABN, but this year or year increase threw me off a bit.

Also, can anyone shed some light on the significance (or lack there of) on the PR released last night?

thanks!

Here is an article I came across on the web: http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2011/01/03/make-liquid-fuels-from-methane-and-co2/


The UoS technology was developed over the past decade by Dr. Wang at UoS, which may explain or at least give a reason to why Dr. Naveed Aslam has decided to part ways with Carbon Sciences. Either way, I see this being a great partnership

I'm sure glad you are on this board. Thanks for the info

I agree Mike....I am one of the confused. The recent PR states the bad news about the MOST RECENT patent pertaining to the catalysts. I am assuming that all patents before this are ok? Also, how easy will it be to change the development process that they mentioned in the bad news PR? How long does this put us back? If they are able to get this changed, will the next patent filing process end in the same way in the finding that it is already out there?

If the catalysts that CABN developed is already out there, who uses it? How long has it been around? Why is that company not successful in bringing it to commercialization?

As for the Pump and Dump, I don't agree with that statement. CABN has never shown a history of this type of action and I don't think they are starting now. I believe they have a strong technology that can change the world as we know it. Byron knows this and I don't believe he would jeopordize the trust of investors by doing a pump and dump.

Hopefully Byron gets back to you soon with some insight on the recent PR and what this means for the company.

Thanks Alex. I have looked into them and continue to monitor, but have yet to buy in

I didn't get a chance to listen or read the transcript. But what I got from reading a few trusted posts on sites, they are making progress but are not on the same schedule as they originally thought. This doesn't surprise me as there will always be set backs or things will take longer than expected when you are trying to develope a break through technology....such as curing the world's dependency on crude oil.

I believe they will be filing more patents in the upcoming months and I think someone said they hoped to have a JV deal by June 2011. I'm putting this date back 6 months to December 2011 or even January 2012 and just hope that they surprise me and get it done before then.

This is one of my plays where I am not expecting any major changes in portfolio value for the next couple years. In 5 years I would like to see it worth at least $10 if everything pans out. Hoping for even a few 2-1 or 3-1 splits along the way as well years from now to double or triple positions.

Sorry Mike.....didn't see that you missed it before I posted my last one asking if you listened in.

Were you able to join the conference call yesterday? I was in meetings all evening and was unfortunately not able to join.

Anybody else listen in?


Thanks in advance

not the end of the world?????? Are you serious????

how are you even semi-ok with them completing a 1-24000 RS?????????

So.........the 1/24,000 RS gives ARTSD a price of 2.40

How long before we are back at no bid??? I give it 10 months

Do NOT delete this post because it is accurate. Just because ARTS doesn't have it posted doesn't mean it isn't true. Look at the link provided from OTC. New symbol is ARTSD.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I tend to agree with you. Is the phone conference coming up the one that was pushed back because they were waiting for deals to be completed before announcing? I would imagine that if truely is going to be huge news, we would get a PR sometime tomorrow before the conference call so they can discuss with the investors that call in???

No I haven't. I put $6400 in this POS and that is as much as I am willing to lose. Stopped buying a long time ago.

Not sure about you Mike, but I'm hoping we actually do go as low as .02 or .03. Gives us a chance to really load up. If they do go that low, no way they can stay there for long.

I expect the Picasso to sell the same time the dividends are paid....never. They don't own the Picasso. Plain and simple. Another BS PR to dump earlier this year.

I do applaud your ability to everyday wake up with a positive attitude towards this POS. Not sure how you do it, but good for you

Sadly, the ONLY way this can ever come close to a penny again is going to be with a RS. Unless they buy back shares, but they have no money

All due respect...please stop using the word pennyland when referring to ARTS. It is absolutely ridiculous and absurd to think ARTS can come anywhere close a penny

Just an opinion article I read, but on topic anyway. All true...if the U.S. is going to move forward with clean energy, it needs to be soon because other countries are way ahead of us.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/08/caldwell.gordon.energy/index.html?hpt=T2



I know a company that can help out big time with these issues and glad I got in before others found out about it!!

I applaud any individual/company for an advancement in technology in this field because it is only going to draw attention to investors that will filter money into companies trying to progress in this field. However, I personally believe CABN's goal to be superior to Dr. Lackner. Reason being, Dr. Lackner's "air capture" project does nothing to eliminate further CO2 release into the air. CABN would capture it at the source of some of the major offenders and limit future pollutants. Just my opinion, but hope they both succeed

Not sure if anyone saw this report, but the untapped oil reserves estimate in Alaska was reduced by 90%!!

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/27/alaska.oil.reserves/index.html


That is a pretty significant reduction in the estimate. What happened if other countries came out and said they over estimated their reserves as well, and at the same time CABN comes out and says we have a way to produce gasoline without using oil. Other countries would be coming to the US for gasoline...how would that effect our national debt?!?!?! (because you know the jokers of politicians in DC would want to get a piece of CABN, if not run it)


I have to say, out of all my holdings in pennyland, this is the one that is the most exciting because of all the potential.

Have they even paid the PR company yet????

Just a thought, but maybe the next piece of news is going to be about them changing the name of Starfest Direct to Sportfest Direct??? Kind of like when they said "Artfest Direct is launching"....then NO news about progress. Then we find out they changed from Artfest Direct to Starfest Direct. Then we get a PR saying "Starfest Direct is launching"....still no news and they are diluting all along to line EV's pockets.

I can see it now....."Artfest International is proud to announce the name change of Starfest Direct to Sportfest Direct to more accurately describe our product and will be launching in Spring 2011!! Investors please don't stop buying our shares...we still have about 6 billion to sell and we need the cash to continue to improve shareholder value"


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Now that would be funny!!

and how many of these companies had over 10 billion O/S with a 20 billion A/S??????

thanks!

To my understanding, the actual cost to produce the gasoline would be such that we as consumers are paying roughly about the same as now, maybe just slightly lower. However, being able to produce the gasoline, we would not have to rely on foreign products thus giving us security. I don't know if Byron actually ever gave us a prediction of the price per gallon we could expect to pay, but I thought I remembered him saying something like it would be relatively the same. Anybody know if he guessed at a number?

I think you have the wrong idea of what the call is about later. I didn't get from the emails that were posted here that this is a "shareholder" conference call, but more of a conference call for all the members that have signed up with starfest (assuming they actually have members that have signed up to sell their products....we don't know because WE HAVEN'T SEEN A PR WITH ANY UPDATE ON STARFEST)

I don't believe this call is going to be geared towards the information you are looking to get. Who knows tho...