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.
Enthusiasm is nice. Real product production and stock price improvement would be a lot nicer.
Reviewing the CYPW reports for the past several years, it appears that we are not much closer to a decent ROI than we were four years ago. CYPW has had control of this shell since July 2007 - that's six years now. That should be long enough to get something in the field and fully accepted by a customer. That should also be long enough to have acquired glowing testimonials from those customers who are benefitting from CYPW's technology on a daily basis.
Sadly, we're not there yet.
Sadder still, the confidence that we will ever get there is eroding. If Chris Nelson was worthy as a CEO, he would ensure that a strategic plan was prepared, in place and that shareholders were made aware of it. Does anyone even know when / where the next shareholder meeting will be held? It's been a while and the lack of useful, solid, verifiable announcements from CYPW is alarming.
The stock price still is not improving. CYPW management must become a lot more forthcoming on this demonstrable lack of performance. Further, they should articulate a plan to improve their financial condition going forward. Shareholder relations appear to be a foreign concept to them. Having dealt with Chris Nelson years ago, this comes as no surprise. CYPW needs a management houscleaning in a major way and a change in technical & market direction if this non-performance continues.
That publication may or may not reveal the details for the loan agreement. We'll find out.
It shouldn't. Harry executed an assignment statement whch assignes the rights to the IP to CYPW itself. Based upon the published quarterlies, there is no provision for it to "revert" to Harry. Anyone loaning money to CYPW whould want some security in whatever assets that CYPW holds. From their published, official balance sheets, it's the IP that has some value so any creditor would want peemptive rights to that IP should CYPW defaul on the loan.
What other assets of CYPW would be sufficient to borrow against? If they have anything significant that could be used as loan colateral, it's certainly not listed on the balance sheets.
Another option for the lenders is that they may have buyers for the IP - enough to cover any potential loan losses. Since CYPW owns the IP (not Harry Schoell) that asset no doubt figured heavily in the decision to go forward - and in the detailed terms of the loan.
Financial results are what ultimately matter. Feelings are irrelevant. Right now, CYPW is not generating good financial results.
I have spoken with Schoell and Nelson before some time ago. The problem is that there is no speaking with them. They know everything and everyone else knows nothing. So be it. Willful ignorance is the most serious of all.
"Enough small bricks will still build a house" - only if they are intelligently assembled Otherwise, they're just a useless pile of bricks.
I welcome any engineering success by CYPW. It's a shame that it took from 2007 - 2013 to identify this material-science-related issue. That delay is indicative of potentially serious intellectual blindness. What else does CYPW not know that they need to know to create a commercially successful engine?
You are pointedly ignoring the real issue: the nature and seriousness of the engineering hurdles still facing CYPW. Those issues are very real and are roadblocks to further progress. If you believe that all of these have been resolved, then please supply proof.
CYPW's recent announcements call into question how OSU, the "Ohio manufacturer" and everyone else being "called into service" will be compensated. No one works for free and I expect further dilution, probably extreme.
If you have answers to any of the issues that I and others are raising, please enlighten us all. This is supposed to be a forum for serious discussion but I see little of that, unfortunately.
I hope that the LSR car collaboration with OSU will be a vehicle for improving the operational reliability of the CYPW engine (all puns intended). That collaboration might be a way to bring in additional expertise without Harry having to publicly admit that he can't solve the remaining engineering issues by himself or with his existing team.
CYPW has a serious reliability problem when operating under load. Using supercritical steam as a lubricant creates all sorts of interesting material science issues.
By way of technical background, "supercritical" is a thermodynamic expression describing the state of a substance where there is no clear distinction between the liquid and the gaseous phase (i.e. they are a homogenous fluid). Water reaches this state at a pressure above 22.1 megapascals (MPa).
Steam conditions up to 30 MPa/600°C/620°C are achieved using steels with 12% chromium content. Up to 31.5 MPa/620°C/620°C is achieved using Austenite, which is a proven, but expensive, material. Nickel-based alloys, e.g. Inconel, would permit 35 MPa /700°C /720°C.
The main concerns are steam oxidation and liquid phase corrosion are serious concerns. CYPW claims to have dealt with these via a tightly closed system and the pre-elimination of any corrosive materials. No closed system is 100% perfect so maybe they're having issues therein. I don't know, I'm simply presenting possibilities.
CYPW is being very cagey about the engineering hurdles, but I believe that the likely possibilities are certainly worthy of discussion on this forum, since they directly impact CYPW's ability to produce something that actually works in the field.
I agree. Having dealt with both Chris Nelson and Harry Schoell, I recognize their strengths but I am also not blind to their weaknesses, which are bordering on severe. They have created expectations that are simply unrealistic. This has been a habit and it partly explains all of the missed deadlines and milestones. This habit is borne out of the tremendous pressure to raise capital to continue operations.
The other reason for missed deadlines is the simple fact that the engine in its current state lacks sufficient reliability. Reporting "250 aggregate hours of operation" does not instill confidence. In fact, it reveals a serious engineering problem which may end up as a material science issue.
Right now, it appears that those who can cash out are doing so (e.g., those individuals and organizations who have been compensated with tradable stock in lieu of cash payments or salary). I can't blame 'em because they need to get something while they can.
You cannot spend "expectations" on salaries and development. You need real money for that. The only other approach is further dilution, which has been CYPW's M.O.
China is well-known for trampling on IP rights. I'd rate the value of a Chinese patent right up there with an octegenarian's G.E.D. China uses their own PTO system for acquiring foreign technologies, not protecting them. Good luck fighting an infringement battle in a Chinese court.
The other unspoken issue is that customer sales are required for financial success. If sections of the CYPW engine are still in the research stage after 6 years (2007-2013) then they are in real trouble.
The people who really profited from this stock were Robin Moody, Jim DiPrima and a small group of about 13-21 individuals who got "special treatment" when the reverse merger was done between CTTJ and Cyclone Power back in July 2007.
What are they going to pay him with? Sharp guys don't work for peanuts...
I'd like to see that success - but - CYPW has been operating as a public company since July 2007. That's coming up on six years with no light at the end of the tunnel yet.
The story is always in the stock price. This is not about technology - it's about investing.
Yet another partnership for an undeveloped technology. If you're a university Professor writing technical papers, this is great stuff. If you're a publicly-traded company that has already suffered funding shortages, extreme dilution and a crippling lack of sales, this is not so good.
You may invest in LENR stuff if that's your fancy. Good luck.
I am very concerned that CYPW is not focused enough on getting their own house in order by:
a) ensuring that the technology works reliably
b) successfully deploying it for paying customers
c) the huge amount of dilution that has occurred since CYPW's takeover of the CTTJ shell in July 2007
d) the ongoing "musical chairs" with management and the BoD.
These are all indicative of serious issues at CYPW which I am hopeful that they can rectify. Right now, the frequency of "partnership-type" announcements without any follow-through with actual product sales and deployment is not good.
If you want to believe in LENR, have at it. No harm, no foul.
However, if CYPW's management starts believing in LENR and takes their eye off the ball of generating shareholder value, then we have a serious problem. CYPW must remain focused on getting their technology to work reliably and then getting it to market successfully. Anything else is mis-management.
BTW, you are free to invest in LENR technology at any time. Good luck.
I remain unimpressed with LENR. The physics is unproven and the technology is not there. If CYPW management is wasting time even looking at 10-20 year "pipe dreams" then CYPW needs new management ASAP.
I meant that FLA law is very clear about the fiduciary responsibility that Directors and Officers have towards the shareholders. The potential penalties for malfeasance are also clear.
So, I am hopeful that CYPW's D&O folks understand this and do everything possible to avoid further dilution and get their business side in order. Right now, it's not in order and they urgently need to address that.
Agreed on the "producive part". However, to do so requires understanding the history of CYPW, how they acquired the shell, the legal issues pertaining thereto, the classes of stock that were established, the rights pertaining thereto, the amounts that have been periodically sold under one or more SEC categories (including a regulation S sale), the quantity and frequency of below-market sales, the amounts of stock given in lieu of salaries and in exchange for reducing accounts payable too those vendors that would accept it, the amount of outstanding debt that remains, etc.
Sadly, I doubt that 1 in 4 posters have actually read all of the reports in their entirety and so they have no clue as to any of the preceding items - or even their relevance to the stock price and its likely direction in the near future.
Too many people keep rambling mindlessly about the technology and completely ignore the financial and business aspects of CYPW. That does not lead to a productive discussion about CYPW as an investment vehicle.
LENR technology is miles away from deployment. Don't count on anything significant there anytime soon.
Agreed. Hopefully, the personal exposure under FLA law is a motivating factor.
Nowhere in that announcement is there any indication of imminent funding for an "expansion". PRs such as these hurt credibility, not help it. It would be far better if CYPW were to say less - and do more.
CYPW has trouble meeting its current level of expenses. Any additional funds can only come from product sales, direct investment dollars or convertible loans. The last two will cause further dilution.
I agree with your sentiment, but I'll call it an innovation only when a new market is successfully tackled and a new revenue stream generated thereby. Until then, Harry is an inventor / tinkerer only.
Agreed. The only hope that I have is that the people involved are financially exposed. So, they have - or should have - a very real and very significant incentive to make this work and generate some real value. Shareholder lawsuits are a very real possiblity and the D&O folks will have personal liability under Florida law.
"What happened with that?" Easy. They sold stock at below market rate to get cash and they paid off various debts (or portions thereof) with stock to those vendors willing to accept it to reduce expenditures.
Do you ever read the 10Ks? Do you understand what they contain?
Yes, I trust their filings. I am also glad that Harry is focusing on the product and related engineering. Having spoken directly with him quite some time ago, it became quickly apparent that he was not a businessman, but rather, a gifted inventor.
Hopefully, the new CEO will bring contacts on both the capital raising side and on the sales side because both are needed for CYPW's continued survival.
That "DD" has been well-known since CYPW's inception in July 2007. For about the same length of time, CYPW has been spectacularly unsuccessful in accomplishing that goal. There is no credible evidence to believe that the future will be any different.
The real story - from both the business and financial perspectives - is contained within the official SEC filings made by CYPW. Anything outside of those filings constitutes nothing more than hearsay and should not be relied upon for accuracy or even relevance.
All experienced investors should know that.
You may be correct, but I hope not. Our only hope as shareholders is that the large amount of stock issued/sold at below market since 2007 will soon become exhausted and the more recently issued/sold stock at $0.19/share will become the new support point.
Of course, CYPW could surprise us all and actually produce something that works and generates revenue, but that's still a low probability event.
Agreed. The quarterly reports tell the story.
Please read the reports. It's all in there. Here's the link: http://www.cyclonepower.com/reports.html
The summary is that CYPW issued 1,120,612 shares for services and prepaid options/debt restructuring for three promissory notes.
CYPW also issued 5,000,000 shares for CYPW's 2010 stock option plan (once the options/warrants are exercised) and 3,825,000 shares for CYPW's 2012 stock option plan (once the options/warrants are exercised).
That's a lot of shares.
I read the most recent report and Schoell's letter. Progress is good, but it needs to get a lot better - and soon.
As a practical matter, CYPW is still issuing too many shares. The price will remain at this low level for at least another 6 months - 1 year because the recipients of these of these shares will be allowed to liquidate them 6 months after official receipt. With that many shares coming to market in a steady flow, CYPW's financial performance would have to increase by at least a factor of five to make a sufficient market for such shares. Until and unless that happens, we shareholders had better get used to 7-8 cents per share.
Here are the reports. Read each one carefully: http://www.cyclonepower.com/reports.html
You have to examine ALL reports, starting with the first one. They will list shares issued and the dollars received, or "debt settled" or in lieu of salary. Then you'll have to do your own long division and then you'll see what the effective share price was for that specific block of shares. It takes a little time but the process is quite revealing.
I am quite surprised that allegedly savvy investors do not do this on a regular basis.
The facts are clearly disclosed in the quarterly reports. A smart investor will read them over carefully and count up the shares issued and note the various prices of those shares over the history of the company. A smart investor will also take not of the capital structure and its impact on the marketability of those shares, voting rights and their implication for managerial control.
If you look at the quarterly reports from the beginning, shares have always been sold at below market. Of course, that pricing varied considerably to reflect the current market: from 0.05/share to 0.20/share. It's all in the quarterly reports, per SEC requirements.
It's going to hold in the 7's because the stock that was given / issued in lieu of salaries to key personnel was done in the 6 cents / share range. Stock sold to foreign interests had slightly higher share prices at various times. Each sale/issuance, however, was always done at below market rates.
All of this is listed within the quarterly reports but most people either can't read or do not wish to read them.