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.
Hi Terry. I appreciate the commentary. Other stories of other inventions can often make for interesting reading.
My point, however, remains. The specific issue at hand is CYPW and its viability (or lack thereof). Quote: "I think Schoell really, really believes everything he says. Whether others should or not I leave to others to judge for themselves."
I agree that Schoell believes his own "stuff" but that does not make it any more real. Having spoken with Schoell, it was very clear that he can be quite bullheaded about his "stuff" which can lead to an unwillingness to listen to any other viewpoint.
Through various mechanisms (PPMs, PRs, etc.) the investors were repeatedly told of an engine and a technology that worked. We were also told of deals that were made (e.g., Bent Glass, etc.). None of those turned out to be true.
Based upon that experience, I cannot afford to believe anything but a real engine, which we do not have at this point in time.
Agreed. CYPW has appeared in brief videos and publications before so your suggestion should pose no ideological or conceptual issue for them.
@Terry & Tom - I think that the issue is not the intrinsic value of patents. Rather, the issue is more specifically the value of the various CYPW patents. I brought this issue up a while ago when it was first revealed that OSU's CAR was making significant changes in the CYPW design. That would necessarily affect one or more patents because the overall design and some specific parts were patented "as delivered" to OSU's CAR. If some or all of those patented parts are removed to create a "workable" engine by OSU personnel, then the value of those patents goes to zero, as far as their impact on CYPW's business (which is producing and selling engines, so they claim).
Regardless, monies spent on potentially irrelevant IP detracts from actually getting an engine to work sufficiently well to be successfully sold. This has been a problem since July of 2007. Over 6 years is a long wait for a viable product, especially when investors were led to believe that one already existed. Florida law frowns on such misrepresentations, which have been ongoing and cannot be erased from the web.
I am getting very concerned here.
Tom - agreed in all repsects. It's pretty clear that CYPW's lack of a sales model + lack of an engine = lack of financial success. Sadly, I see no easy way out for them. Very high on promises but almost nothing on delivery. Equally sad is that the observation that Harry's entire career has been that way, with none of his "inventions" ever achieving anything more than curiosity status in the marketplace.
@Terry & Tom -
Gents - you two are the first to present well-articulated engineering viewpoints of what little we really know about the CYPW engine's particulars. That is very helpful and I thank both of you for it.
What is your assessment of its fundamental viability?
I already know Schoell's and Nelson's weak spots, having dealt with Chris a number of times and having had a private - but very pointed - conversation with Harry once, some years ago. I came away very concerned from those encounters.
From a business perspective, I see nothing but trouble due to the capital structure and the sheer number of shares issued and outstanding. So, even if the technology is viable, to achieve a decent market cap (= decent share price) it will take a minor miracle which a few engine sales is not going to deliver.
If you have a reason to be more sanguine about this, please let all of us know because those of us who hold a large number of shares (in the millions) would certainly appreciate a sober assessment of CYPW.
Thanks Tom. I appreciate the analysis. I am an engineer as well so I look at things through the same lens.
The bottom line is that today is 10/18/2013 and CYPW acquired the CTTJ shell in July 2007. That's a VERY long time for developing anything which lends support to the existence of technical issues that have thus far not been resolved. My guess is that the design will have to return to a conventional approach as dictated by the basic physics involved. In that case, the value of the "IP" is nearly zero because the final design will likely not include one or more of the "patented components".
Knowing Chris Nelson, I'm pretty sure that he is in full "scramble mode" because he knows this and has no viable business plan going forward. Our only hope is that he can create one if that is indeed even possible.
Thanks, Tom. That's more useful data than we've been able to obtain from CYPW directly.
CYPW acquired the shell - highly encumbered (including one lawsuit which CYPW lost, apparently) - in July 2007. The shell was formerly Mansion Industries, NCST, SDAI, CTTJ and now CYPW.
In July 2007, CYPW allegedly had a prototype engine working already. It is now October 2013 - more than SIX years later - and we are not much closer to real sales of a working engine than we were back in July 2007. Having briefly worked with Mr. Nelson many years ago and having spoken wth Mr. Schoell, I am extremely disappointed - but I am not surprised. Neither individual is qualified to lead a public company. Mr. Nelson is/was in the securities business and he has been adept at financing via periodic stock issuances, except for one SEC warning.
Nonetheless, CYPW remains in deep financial trouble with a LOT of accumulated debt obligations. Lawsuits over some of that debt are certainly possible. Win or lose doesn;t even matter much - it's just one more distraction that CYPW doen't need right now.
Right now, all of the individuals who have taken stock in lieu of compensation (whether employees, contractors or suppliers) are dumping it to get what liquidity they can. They need cash now and cannot afford to wait.
CYPW's problem is that there are so many shares out there that anyone wanting to make a VERY risky investment in CYPW via a PPM is going to demand a significant amount of equity, which means a LOT of shares = a lot of dilution. This will happen even if a new share class is created.
Harry, Frankie and anumber of key advisors/technical consultants aren't getting any younger. I wouldn't expect too much more out of them.
Price continues to drop, as expected. The volume/price chart is very clear: CYPW is headed nowhere but down. Expect another hand-off of this shell within 18 months.
Agreed. Such contracts are not good. Expect more dilution. The recent uptick in volume is quite easily seen from the shares issued to various parties under Rule 144 in prior periods. This rule has expired for those shares and the people that require liquidity are getting it while they can. Frankly, I'm surprised that the market could absorb that many shares without depressing the price even further. CYPW's capital structure is quite messed, with far too many shares issued. Mismanagement in the extreme.
BTW, the claim of the second Russian Patent is beyond stupid and has descended to just plain silly. That's got a net worth of about $1.50. I'm sure that they paid their attorneys in shares as well since they have no cash. That may explain some of the volume. We'll see what the 3rd quarter or 4th qaurter reports reveal.
There's no upward pressure on CYPW whatsoever. Your wait is likely nearly over.
The stock price tells the story. Does anyone have an intelligent reason why CYPW is wasting time and scarce dollars on silly patents in a country where they are nearly unenforceable?
I have read some of Schoell's patents. Several of them cover specific engine parts (e.g., the spider bearing) and the geometrical disposition of the cylinders. Since the OSU team has removed 60% of the parts (some of them covered by one or more patents, no doubt), how relevant are those patents now? CYPW appears to be completely rudderless at this point.
Folks, CYPW has got to get serious abut becoming viable. Based upon the volume of stock sales and the depressingly declining price, it's pretty clear that those individuals and organizations who were compensated with stock in lieu of cash are liquidating - while they still can.
Please read the SEC filings - ALL of them. This shell was formerly Mansion Industries, then NCST, SDAI, CTTJ and now CYPW. It was transferred to CYPW with pending lawsuits, evenutally resolved by the issuance of additional common stock.
Yes. No sign of life either. CYPW will just print and issue more stock to survive until they just can't sell it anymore. The company will become moribund at that point. After a 6 month hiatus, a new reverse merger (RM) will occur with existing sharehlders getting squeezed 80-20 (or 90-10). The "new company" may even involve the existing key stakeholders in CYPW. Either way, we common stockholders will get screwed. This shell has been passed around more than a bottle of cheap whiskey at a frat party.
This stock is in a slow, steady decline and has been for a couple of years. I see no market forces providing an upward push.
I wonder what happened to those investor dollars that were thrown at "Team Steam" and the LSR car powered by CYPW's "engine"?
I wonder if the engine parts that were not required with the "new design" were covered under one or more of Schoell's patents? So much for their value...
CYPW achieved goals for themselves at the expense of us common stockholders. That gravy train has about run out, which motivated all of the creative financing that has been done and reported on the quarterlies. THAT gravy train will end soon as well.
CYPW's financial leash is short so they'd better produce something that works very soon.
You claim to have information about patent purchase offers that were extended to CYPW. Such information is not commonly available. It's not in any CYPW filing nor is it on their website.
So, since this appears to be a company "secret", how did you become aware of it? Do you have some special relationship with CYPW which gives you access to private information? What exactly is your relationship with CYPW?
I responded to your assertions of such "patent purchase" offers and their financial significance. I naturally assumed that you were privy to such knowledge. If you are, then would you please share it?
If you're not, then why did you post something that has no factual basis?
Sorry, but I cannot accept that without proof. How much was offered and who offered it? When was the offer made? A "Tidy Sum" could mean almost anything.
It would be nice, but I don't see that happening. CYPW's complex capital structure and outstanding financial obligations are far too high to attract any acquirers. CYPW has nearly zero intrinsic value. The patents are already leveraged, which is what enabled the various debt instruments that are keeping them financially alive. In short, there is nothing attractive about CYPW as an acquisition target.
Agreed. CYPW management controls the PR flow. If any of those PRs contain errors and/or omissions, CYPW management is solely responsible for those. If CYPW management knowingly issued false PRs, that is called fraud.
Having dealt with Chris Nelson in another life, I would not take his word on anything relating to his interest in - or management of - CYPW. He's out for the "quick buck" any way that he can get it.
Has anyone wondered why CYPW has not been able to secure any institutional funding? In all of their quarterly reports, they warn the shareholders of the urgent need for cash and raise doubts as to whether or not CYPW can continue as a going concern. This need for cash - and the current deficit is around $3 million - should be a warning to everyone involved.
Based upon the institutional funders that I have recently spoken with (e.g., 11T Partners, Volition Capital, Bessemer, Sequoia, etc.) they will NOT make a move unless a company is at least financially stable. They also will not get involved if the capital structure is overly complex, as is CYPW's. They want their investment dollars to be applied towards capturing and expanding markets for a working product.
Right now, CYPW is a long way from that stage. Sadly, until and unless CYPW can get to that point, they will have to reply on creative financing, which does not bode well for us common stock holders.
Great Wall Motor Co. is NOT the same as Great Wall Alternative Power Systems, LTD.
Is there anyone from Great Wall willing to go on the record stating clearly what relationship they have with CYPW? I think that you may be conflating two separate organizations here.
Sounds like Precision CNC needs more space. No word on if or when a cylone engine will be ready for production.
I still am a shareholder with a significant position, although I have liquidated some over a year ago when the price was a lot higher. Again, the focus should be on what CYPW's official SEC filings reveal.
My posts are not illogical. They are 10Q fact-based. It also appears that I and only a few other posters actually read ALL of the official CYPW SEC filings so that we know what is really going on. Everyone else seems to rely on the "hype de jure" of whatever the latest PR says. That's extremely foolish and a waste of serious investors' time.
I have been a shareholder for many years. I believed in the technology and the market at one point. Now, years later, after repeated failures to deliver, depressing 10Q filings, "musical chair management", severe cash flow issues, engine reliability issues, extreme stock dilution, excessive use of promissory notes for funding and significant liquidation by insiders, it's clear that CYPW is not going to make it unless a miracle happens.
If you are aware of any relevant facts not revealed in the various 10Q filings, then please brighten our day with those and provide some proof as well. Until then, I'll continue to base my evaluations in the facts at hand, which are contained within the various SEC filings, produced by CYPW itself.
The 10Q is the official document. It tells the complete story. I'll base my opinions on that document as opposed to any "attempt-to-soothe-shareholders" letter from Harry Schoell.
Yes, but more importantly this: Product + Sales = Success. THAT's the equation that CYPW management cannot seem to solve.
Still waiting for a reasonable explanation of the bad stuff in the 10Q.
They shouldn't be impressed. They're likely scared - and justifiably so.
I read the 10Q. Extremely disappointing, as were the others before it. The bottom line is that there is no upward pressure on the stock price. All of the company's activities are related to issuing stock in exchange for anything they can get: cash, supplies, labor. Everyone on the "inside" is liquidating whatever shares they can to get cash. They're trying to keep the price about $0.07 but even that plateau is shaky. Without a doubt, they are poorly managed and even the engineering is bad because they just cannot produce anything that works well enough to get paid.
BTW, how they recognize revenue is funny because the cash is still not flowing in any relationship to the official "balance sheet recognition" of revenue. That is VERY alarming because it's telling me that they do indeed have outstanding obligations product performance-wise which they - so far - have been unable to meet. THAT's why the checks are not "rolling in" and they've had to resort to a variety of convertible debt instruments to survive.
If any of you "pro-CYPW" folks out there disagree with my assessment, then please prove me wrong. Until I see strong evidence to the contrary, I'll go by what the the offical 10Q clearly reveals.
Shredded stock certificates are the most plausible engine fuel. They sure have enough of them out there to do that.
I have posted about this before = key CYPW people need cash and this is their only way of getting it. Management is looking after themselves only. They're using the public markets to get what they can when they can. This has been going on for a long time.
Give it time....
I probably own more CYPW shares than anyone else posting on this forum (a couple of million shares, btw). That's why I am so disappointed in the lack of progress and apparent lack of intelligent management. If I were on the board of directors, there would either be real progress from the current staff (= product + sales) or I'd be looking for new staff - Schoell included. I would also push very hard for a change in the capital structure because the existing structure is very anti-common stockholder. That by itself is limiting the buying.
Normally, the inventor is not the guy to carry the company forward and Harry Schoell has proven that. Chris Nelson, an attorney, has been no better. He lacks the background in either sales or design and has certainly not worked very well with the market makers - where his expertise theoretically lies (he's allegedly in securities law). Stock is easy to sell if you're giving it away, as has been happening here for a long time.
The tremendous amount of dilution that has occurred to satisfy debt and pay off employees has gone beyond what any rational manager would do. A bank revolver should have been established a long time ago and used carefully to prevent extreme dilution. The patents could have been used as collateral as well as Harry's other assets (e.g., Schoell Marine's assets). Now, it's appears to be too late even for that.
If you have any intelligent suggestions for CYPW to move forward (=products + sales) then please let management know because right now, they are dead in the water. All this PR about "teaming agreements", etc. means nothing.
Products + Sales = Success. It's a simple equation that CYPW appears not to understand.
Until the sellers are significantly reduced in volume, no amount of buying will positively impact the price. There are too many people who need to monetize the stock that they were given in lieu of "real" compensation.
Of course, an embarrassing lack of business and engineering progress on the part of CYPW doesn't help :)
The interesting fact here is that the vast majority of stock sales are from people & organizations that were compensated in stock instead of cash. Their Rule 144/145 restrictions are up and they are liquidating as they can without depressing the price too much. For them, it's not an investment, it's simply about monetizing compensation already accepted in lieu of cash.
The real investors are the ones buying, not the ones selling. If you examine ALL of the 10ks and look at the initial set of stock agreements back in July 2007, you'll see that there were a lot of games played with the capital structure as part of the initial takeover of the shell. Most of those folks involved with that (CTTJ before CYPW) got out when the stock briefly hit in the 0.30s & 0.40s so they are long gone. An examination of the 10ks also reveals thte total quanity of stock issued in lieu of cash compensation. Not all of that has been liquidated even now.
So, if you combine a messy capital structure with the lack of corporate financial performance, it's amazing that the price hasn't dipped much lower.