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.
Well peep. Looks like you are wrong!!
Looks to me like PWTC owns the patent!!
logman
Power Technology Wins in Patent Dispute Court Hearing
Friday July 2, 9:40 am ET
Defendant Ordered to Sign Patent
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 2, 2004--Power Technology, Inc (OTCBB:PWTC - News) announced today that in a court hearing held in Las Vegas yesterday, defendant Alvin Snaper was informed by the court that he is to be ordered to sign Power Technology's patent application for Korea.
After verbally informing all parties in the courtroom of her decision, the judge told all parties a written order to this effect will be issued in the near future.
This Press Release includes projections of future results and "forward-looking statements" as that term is defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 as amended (the "Securities Act"), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended (the "Exchange Act"). All statements included in this Press Release, other that statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. Although Management believes that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable. It can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the expectations are disclosed in this Press Release, including, without limitation, in conjunction with those forward-looking statements contained in this Press Release.
Contact:
Princeton Research
J. Michael King, 702-650-3000
702-493-3683
krw57 because IMO AS has held PWTC down and kicked us through the mud for a year and some months. No one would wants to sign a deal with the patent issue hanging over PWTC's head. IMO that has come to an end!
IMO PWTC can now move forward! IMO PWTC will move forward!
When there is a class action against snaper I will sign my name on the list against him.
logman
Don you have mail.
Very COOL. I would have loved to have been there.
I have said time and time again. AS is no friend to PWTC shareholders.
When do we get the class action law suite going against AS??
Count me in!!
logman
TRCPA thanks.
I still think the old KDS is the answer to the Avian Flue problem.
Just takes a little money to make it happen.
Thanks again. logman
More on the Avian Flue.
Chinese researchers say a current strain of the flu has been changing to become more dangerous to people. They fear that constant mutations could cause it to pass to humans more easily. And they worry it might combine with human flu in someone's body, creating a potent hybrid.
Human infections from bird flu are rare. It has killed six people in Hong Kong and human cases have also been reported in Vietnam and Thailand.
I was listening to Paul Harvey Monday and he had a story about the Avian Flue.
Scientists are growing concerned about a type of bird flu that is becoming more infectious to mammals. They fear it could pose a threat to humans worldwide.
Seems like FASC has the answer they are looking for.
logman
I see that PWTC,s web site is back on Vebco's links.
http://www.vebcointernational.com/
Relations between Vebco and Power look to be doing just fine.
Peep. You can only have one alias on IHUB.
You are using 2.
peep and catchet are the same person.
Go to Vebco's web site.
Look near the bottom.
http://www.vebcointernational.com/
Larry, once again sorry. I was mislead. OK
Thank you trainz.
Hi lab,
You said "not only will we build them,but we will construct and design the machinery so that we can build them in mass."
Can you respond on a time frame when this could be achieved?
Have the machinery and mass produce?
MM's don't want to fill an order. I put in a buy before open at ask .035 for 50,000 shares and they walked around it. Still no fill?
Power Technology Contracts Vebco Technologies, Inc. Engineering and Process Design Group -- www.vebcointernational.com
Thursday June 3, 9:00 am ET
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 3, 2004--Power Technology, Inc. (OTCBB:PWTC - News) has contracted Vebco Technologies, Vancouver, Canada. The Objectives: to produce prototypes for delivery for end users for field trials and testing, to design and develop new technology for the commercial production of our award-winning (www.frost.com) battery technology.
Vebco's team assigned to our project is a group of experienced mechanical engineers and process designers. The five team-members have thoroughly researched Power's patented reticulated technology and are capable to meet this challenge.
As stated by Vebco Technologies team leader Tataru Viorel, PhD, PEng, "We are very excited to have been awarded this contract with Power Technology, Inc. to implement the technology in the field and to bring the reticulated lead-acid battery into the commercial realm. This is the most exciting development in the lead-acid industry in over 100 years and in the near future will replace lead-acid batteries as we now know them."
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements can be identified by lead-in "Looking Forward." These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may vary materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of the effectiveness of management's strategies and decisions, general economic and business conditions, new or modified statutory or regulatory requirements, and changing price and market conditions. No assurance can be given that these are all the factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from the forward-looking statement. Risks and uncertainties of the Company will be detailed from time to time in the Company's periodic reports to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Contact:
Power Technology, Inc
Lee A Balak, 604-925-0716
Practical Solutions for The Planet
Yes Ed. A grateful thank you to all that have fallen to make this a strong and free nation.
And a thank you to all the families that lost a family member so that we can all be free!
May 28, 2004
Army Shows Off Alternative Energy Vehicles
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 5:09 a.m. ET
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- Hybrid tankers that can power an entire airfield. Electric chariots that can take soldiers to their destinations. Fuel cell-powered all terrain vehicles that can move in near silence.
These are among alternative energy vehicles being developed by the Army, which showed off a dozen prototypes Thursday at Elmendorf Air Force Base.
The Army hopes the vehicles will reduce its fuel consumption on the battlefield, and other military branches are watching closely. In fact, the Air Force has assigned a representative to the Army's Detroit-based National Automotive Center, which is developing the vehicles through partnerships with manufacturers.
``Our intention is to find common-use items that work not only commercially but with the military,'' said Army spokesman Eric Emerton.
The open house was the show-and-tell portion of a four-day symposium co-hosted by the Army to explore clean energy sources for and from Alaska.
Military and industry engineers and others led visitors around vehicles both ready for use and under development.
All represented the virtues of energy-saving technology that's so crucial at a time when the Army burns 750,000 gallons of fuel a day in Iraq alone, said NAC Director Dennis Wend.
Reality, however, is three to five years away for the more advanced equipment, Wend said. The automotive research center, created a decade ago, has intensified its alternative energy development only in the last few years.
Besides corporate money, the center receives $100 million in federal research and development funds.
Among the vehicles on display was the tanklike hybrid-electric diesel truck developed with Oshkosh, Wis.-based Oshkosh Truck Corp., which builds the Army's large off-road vehicles as well as civilian fire and refuse trucks. Painted in camouflage tones, the Oshkosh HEMTT consumes less fuel and puts out reduced emissions compared with its traditionally fueled counterparts.
The vehicle also can produce 350 kilowatts of electricity while its 505 horsepower engine idles. The company tested the vehicle's onboard generator at the Whittman Airfield in Oshkosh, providing lighting for the control tower and a 14,000-foot runway for two hours. It was a hit -- signifying numerous applications for the military and civilians alike, said company engineer Chris Yakes.
``It can be used for anything from natural disasters to homeland security,'' Yakes said.
------
On the Net: The New York Times
Form 10KSB for POWER TECHNOLOGY INC CN
28-May-2004
Annual Report
Item 6. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF PLAN OF OPERATION.
Management's Discussion and Alalysis and Plan of Operation
The following discussion of the Company's financial condition andresults of operations should be read in connection with the Company'sconsolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing elsewhere in thisannual report. This discussion contains statements reflecting the opinions ofmanagement as well as forward-looking statements regarding the market and theCompany that involve risk and uncertainty. These statements relate toexpectations and concern matters that are not historical facts. Works such as"believes", "expects", "anticipates" and similar expressions used throughoutthis document indicate that forward- looking statements are being made.
Although management of the Company believes that the expectations andopinions reflected in its forward-looking statements are reasonable, thesestatements are not guarantees of future performance. They are subject to risks,uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual performance to differmaterially from projected results. Factors that could cause or contribute todifferences between actual and projected results include, but are not limitedto, the current lack of funding needed for working capital, debt repayment andcapital investment, failure to attract management and staff, the inability togrow membership subscriptions, and lack of success in launching additionalservice offerings. Additional risk factors are disclosed elsewhere in thisannual report.
Power Technology, Inc. (the "Company"), a Nevada corporation, wasincorporated on June 3, 1996.
The Company is in the development stage of developing its batteries andother products. The Company is in the process of building its initial prototypesof its batteries, but has not commenced any commercial production or sales ofbatteries, pipeline connection equipment, or alloy sensors.
Historically, the Company has used the sale of its Common Stock,capital contributions and loans from various stockholders to fund itsoperations. To this point, the Company has not had adequate funds tocommercially produce, market and sell its batteries, pipeline connectionequipment and alloy sensors.
There are no assurances that the Company will be able to obtain aprofitable level of operations.
YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 2004 COMPARED TO 2003
The following table sets forth certain operating information regardingthe Company:
Year Ended Year Ended January 31, 2004 January 31, 2003 ---------------- ----------------
Revenues $ 0 $ 25,000General and administrative expense $ 58,878 $ 286,037Research and development $ 0 $ 144,894Consulting fees $ 254,200 $ 1,761,416Net Loss $ (322,246) $ (2,298,550)Net Loss Per Share $ (.01) $ (.08)
REVENUES.
Total revenues for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were $0 and $25,000,respectively, as the operations of the Company continued to be focused onresearch and development. To date, the Company has not established anycommercial products nor commenced any commercial production operations.
GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
General and administrative expenses decreased from $286,037 in fiscalyear 2003 to $58,878 during the fiscal year ended January 31, 2004, a decreaseof approximately 79.4%. The principal reason for the decrease was the lack ofresearch activities of the Company during fiscal 2004.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES.
Research and development expenses decreased from $144,894 in fiscalyear 2003 to $ -0- during the fiscal year ended January 31, 2004, a decrease of100%, as a result of the termination of all research activities during fiscal20004.
NET LOSS
The net loss of the Company decreased from $(2,298,550) during fiscalyear 2003 compared to a net loss of $(322,246) during the fiscal year endedJanuary 31, 2004, a decrease of approximately 85%. The decrease in the net lossof the Company is attributable primarily to a decrease in consulting fees paidby the Company during the fiscal year ended January 31, 2004, and itstermination of research and development activities.
CAPITAL RESOURCES.
The Company's capital resources have been provided primarily by thesale of its Common Stock for cash of $30,000 for 1,207,500 shares of the CommonStock of the Company.
WORKING CAPITAL AND LIQUIDITY.
At January 31, 2004, the Company had negative working capital ofapproximately $290,780 compared to January 31, 2003, negative working capital inthe amount of $956,729. The Company believes that it will be necessary toincrease it working capital to continue its research and development activitieswhich may be achieved by incurring additional indebtedness from stockholders orothers (see Note 6) or by the sale of Common Stock or other securities of theCompany.
The ability of the Company to satisfy its obligations will depend inpart upon its ability to successfully complete the offer and sale of additionalshares of its Common Stock and in part upon its ability to reach a profitablelevel of operations.
PLAN OF OPERATIONS
Because of the costs of development of its battery systems and otherproducts, and the continuing costs of its battery prototype production, theCompany expects that it will incur a loss during its fiscal year ending January31, 2005.
The Company believes that additional equity capital will be required toaccomplish its plan of operations during the next 12 months. As a result, theCompany is offering to sell its Common Stock to further capitalize the Company,and may also borrow from banks and others to the extent necessary to provideliquidity for its operations, although no arrangements for any additionalborrowings have been made.
The Company has maintained its research and development activities andthe associated costs consistent with its plan of operations in order to developits batteries and other products for proposed commercial production. However,the Company expects to continue the development of its batteries and otherproducts to incorporate technical changes and improvements. In addition, as theCompany establishes its marketing activities, the Company will incur additionaloperating and equipments costs.
UNCERTAINTIES:
DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY.
The Company is in the development stage. There is no assurance that theCompany's activities will be profitable. The likelihood of the success of theCompany must also be considered in light of the problems, expenses,difficulties, complications, delays and all of the inherent risks frequentlyencountered in the formation and operation of a relatively new business.
GOING CONCERN
The financial statements are presented on the basis that the Company isa going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and thesatisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business over a reasonablelength of time.
At January 31, 2004, the Company had a deficit in working capital of$290,780, a loss from operations for the year ended January 31, 2004, of$(322,246) and an accumulated deficit of $(9,073,498) since June 3, 1996, thedate of inception of the Company.
Management believes that current plans to expand the Company'soperations and a combination of its financing and capital raising plans willprovide sufficient working capital to allow the Company to continue as a goingconcern.
COSTS OF CONDUCTING BUSINESS.
The Company will be required to incur substantial costs for researchand development and equipment, establishing production and marketing operations,and related costs. A substantial portion of those costs must be paid whether ornot any of its batteries or other products prove to be commercially successfulon a broad scale. The ability to generate a profit depends, among other factors,on the amount of equipment acquisition costs incurred, the amount of revenuesfrom the sale of batteries and other products by the Company, and its operatingcosts.
COMPETITION.
The battery business is highly competitive. Companies in the industryhave substantially greater financial, marketing, and technical resources thanthe Company. Further, the entry into this industry does not necessarily requirea large capital expenditure and, accordingly, it can be expected that additionalcompetitors may enter the industry in the future. It may be particularlydifficult for a relatively small independent company to compete with largercompanies which have significantly greater resources. There can be no assurancethat the Company will be able to successfully compete if such an environmentdevelops.
TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE.
The Company expects that many new technologies and products will beintroduced in the battery industry over the next several years. The Company'ssuccess will depend, among other things, on its ability to develop and maintaina competitive position technologically. There can be no assurance that theCompany will have access to subsequently developed technology by other persons.Technological advances by a competitor may result in the Company's present orfuture products becoming noncompetitive or obsolete. The Company cannot beassured that competitors will not develop functionally similar or superiorbatteries, which event could have an adverse effect on the Company's business.
CONTRACTS.
The Company has no current contracts for the manufacture or sale of itsbatteries or other products, and has no back-log. There can be no assurance thatthe Company will be able to obtain sufficient and suitable contracts for itsbusiness plan.
FLUCTUATIONS IN OPERATING RESULTS.
The Company's revenues and results of operations may vary significantlyin the future. The Company's revenues and results of operations are difficult toforecast and could be adversely affected by many factors, some of which areoutside the control of the Company, including, among others, the expectedrelatively long sales and implementation cycles for the Company's products; thesize and timing of individual license transactions and joint venturearrangements; seasonality of revenues; changes in the Company's operatingexpenses; changes in the mix of products sold; timing of introduction orenhancement of products by the Company or its competitors; market acceptance ofnew products; technological changes in technology; personnel changes anddifficulties in attracting and retaining qualified sales, marketing, technicaland consulting personnel; changes in customers' budgeting cycles; qualitycontrol of products sold; and economic conditions generally and in specificindustry segments, particularly the automotive industry.
There can be no assurance that the Company's products will achievebroad market acceptance or that the Company will be successful in marketing itsproducts or enhancements thereto. In the event that the Company's current orfuture competitors release new products that have more advanced features, offerbetter performance or are more price competitive than the Company's products,demand for the Company's products would decline. A decline in demand for, ormarket acceptance of, the Company's batteries or other products as a result ofcompetition, technological change, or other factors would have material adverseeffects on the Company's business, financial condition and results ofoperations.
RAW MATERIALS
The basic raw materials and components for the batteries and otherproducts being developed by the Company are readily available. The Company doesnot expect to experience any significant delays in obtaining timely delivery ofits materials and components.
SEASONALITY
The Company does not expect to experience material seasonal variationsin revenues or operating costs, except that sales activity for its batteries mayincrease in the summer and winter seasons which is expected to cause theoperations of the Company to increase during such periods.
tenzzi I never saw your post. I was just stating why your post was removed. I am not the board police for this board. I have no idea what you said or who axed your post.
logman
My guess would be is that one of the caretakers of this board didn't like its content so he or she axed it. I do it all the time on the board I am caretaker of. That is just one of the things you have to deal with on IHUB. That way we can keep the board civil and not turn it into a RB where nothing gets done but fighting. I like the rules of this board! Sorry you are not going to join us here.
Have a good evening. logman
Whats up with FASC today?? No trades??
Power Technology Engages Patent Attorney Kevin J. McNeely, Esq. Washington D.C.
Tuesday May 4, 10:30 pm ET
www.patentek.com
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 4, 2004--Power Technology (OTCBB:PWTC - News) is actively pursuing patent protection for its lead-acid battery technology. The maintenance fee for U.S. Patent No. 6,060,198, which discloses a new and improved battery current collector, was recently paid. The technology employs a reticulated battery plate structure that improves durability and power output of a lead-acid battery while reducing its weight.
In addition, the Company has completed the international preliminary examination process in order to obtain patents for an even newer technology on an improved lead-acid battery with a battery plate that uses a lightweight, porous, open pore material coated with an alloy. The unique design dramatically enhances the cyclability of a lead-acid battery at much higher power levels. National patent protection filings are ongoing with patent applications filed in 29 countries throughout Europe, North America and Asia, and with several more national filings planned. This filing is titled "Current Collector Structure and Method to improve the performance of a Lead-Acid Battery."
Because of the work, Power Technology is the recipient of the Frost and Sullivan engineering award. (www.frost.com) The award is given to the company that has demonstrated technological superiority within its industry. The award recognizes the ability of the company to introduce new technology, formulate a well designed product family and enhance significant performance contributions to the battery industry.
This product once commercially manufactured will replace lead-acid batteries as well as other chemistries in numerous applications. The technology provides superior energy densities, longer cycle life, quick recharge characteristics as well as minimizing the use of lead. Our battery weighs less than half the traditional unit and takes up much less space under the hood.
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements can be identified by the lead-in "Looking Forward." These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may vary materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of the effectiveness of management's strategies and decisions, general economic and business conditions, new or modified statutory or regulatory requirements, and changing price and market conditions. No assurance can be given that these are all the factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from the forward-looking statements.
Contact:
Power Technology, Inc
Lee A Balak, 604-925-0716
e-mail: lbalak@shaw.ca
Source: Power Technology
Thanks credo.
Don't worry about old Dean. We know who he is.
logman
Kiss Off Dean!
Yes otterman we have a very good case for a law suit.
There is a growing force and I think we will see it soon.
Please send you info to Yachtdoctor
Sailtvc@chartermi.net
Thanks, logman
Note the dates. 10/15/1998 snaper was given 1,004,055 shares shares of the Common Stock, $.001 par value ("Common Stock") of the Company in exchange for patent rights.
In June 1999, the Company acquired rights to advanced microwave technology from Alvin A. Snaper and William E. McNerney, directors and officers of the Company, who each received 100,000 shares of restricted Common Stock of the Company in exchange for this technology.
IMO Snaper recieved 804,055 share of pwtc stock for the battery and sold those shares for around $2,010,137.00.
Snaper was given 1,004,055 shares of the Common Stock for the patents. I see listed 100,000 shares for pipelink, 100,000 shares for alloy sensor, that leaves 804,055 for the battery patent!
Form: 10KSB Filing Date: 7/9/1999
In June 1998, the Company acquired its patent rights to its alloy sensor technology from Mr. Alvin A. Snaper, a director, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, in exchange for 100,000 restricted shares of the Common Stock of the Company.
In June 1998, the Company acquired its patent rights to its pipeline connection technology from Advanced Transmission Line ("ATL"), a Nevada limited partnership, in exchange for 100,000 restricted shares of the Common Stock of the Company.
Form: SC 13D Filing Date: 10/15/1998
TEM 3. SOURCE AND AMOUNT OF FUNDS OR OTHER CONSIDERATION
Mr. Snaper acquired 1,004,055 shares of the Common Stock, $.001 par value ("Common Stock") of the Company in exchange for patent rights, without loans or other financing arrangement.
POWER TECHNOLOGY INC/CN
Form: 10KSB Filing Date: 7/9/1999
The strategy of the Company has been to develop automotive battery products that have technological advantages over available alternatives and that are capable of being produced commercially on an economically competitive basis. The Company intends to continue its development efforts to be funded in part through licensees and industrial joint venture partners in order to broaden and build upon its products and technological base. The Company recognizes the need to protect its technology and has a patent pending covering its battery structure and materials.
Mr. Lee A. Balak, the President and a director of the Company, has loaned and advanced $181,281 to the Company as of June 30, 1998, for research and development fees. These advances are non-interest bearing demand loans. The research and development fees were paid by the Company to Neo-Dyne Research, Inc. ("Aneo-Dyne"), a research and development company owned by Alvin A. Snaper, a director and a Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company. Neo-Dyne has conducted substantially all of the research and development activities regarding the principal products of the Company, including its batteries, its pipeline connection technology, and its allow sensor technology, which provided continuity for such services.
Form: 10KSB Filing Date: 7/9/1999
Look at this one!
POWER TECHNOLOGY INC/CN
Form: SC 13D Filing Date: 10/15/1998
TYPE: SC 13D
SEQUENCE: 1
DESCRIPTION: SCHEDULE 13D
ITEM 3. SOURCE AND AMOUNT OF FUNDS OR OTHER CONSIDERATION
Mr. Snaper acquired 1,004,055 shares of the Common Stock, $.001 par value ("Common Stock") of the Company in exchange for patent rights, without loans or other financing arrangement.
Am I wrong here? Does this not say Snaper sold the patent rights to PWTC for 1,004,055 shares of the Common Stock???
Look there is even a SIGNATURE!
SIGNATURE
After reasonable inquiry and to the best of his knowledge and belief, he
certifies that the information set forth in this statement is true, correct
and complete.
/s/ Alvin A. Snaper
----------------------------
Alvin A. Snaper
October 15, 1998
POWER TECHNOLOGY INC/CN
Form: 10SB12G Filing Date: 9/1/1998
Mr. Lee A. Balak, the President and a director of the Company, has loaned and advanced $181,281 to the Company as of June 30, 1998, for research and development fees. These advances are non-interest bearing demand loans. The research and development fees were paid by the Company to Neo-Dyne Research, Inc., a research and development company owned by Alvin A. Snaper, a director and a Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company.
Why would PWTC pay research and development fees to Alvin Snaper if pwtc did not own the patent?
graeme, believe me when I say. There many phone calls being made at this time. The best thing IMO is to send Yachtdoctor any info that you can on how many shares you own and a way to get in touch with you. Also would you be willing to sign on a class action law suite against Alvin Snaper. If you know anyone that owned shares in PWTC and sold their shares for a loss they could also get involved in this class action.
There has been ample time for Snaper as VP of PWTC to dispute PWTC's claim of ownership of the battery patent during his many years as VP. IMO PWTC and we the share holders have had considerable damage done to us because of Snapers claim to the patent. IMO Snaper has no intention of keeping the patent with PWTC. IMO our only hope is to hit him in the pocket book real hard.
P.S. greek KISS OFF!!
Power Technology Receives Notice Of Patent Allowance; Secures Suppliers.
Business Wire, Nov 10, 1999
LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 10, 1999--
Power Technology, Inc. (OTC BB:PWTC), a Las Vegas technology development company, announced today that it has received its first Notice of Allowance from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for its unique battery technology.
The allowance granted encompasses all of the structural aspects of the "Power Battery."
"We anticipate that additional patents will be filed for the unique electrochemical aspects of our battery technology," stated Alvin Snaper, inventor and vice president of Power Technology. "However, the structural patent can be utilized to enhance the performance of conventional battery chemistries."
The Company can now commence efforts to introduce the Company's technology to battery manufacturers for licensing purposes. Power Technology's recently announced agreement with Douglas Battery is the first implementation of the Company's licensing and manufacturing strategy.
The Company further announced that it has secured two suppliers of reticulated plates of the prescribed metallurgy and densities for its uniquely structured "Power Battery," which is in the final stages of development.
The plates are for both the nickel-ferrous and minimized lead-acid versions of the battery. Creating the technical specifications for these plates took months of painstaking product development in both Europe and the United States by leaders in aerospace metals and applied science researchers.
Power Technology teamed with Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (www.fraunhofer.org), one of the world's most prestigious leaders in industrial technologies, as well as with California-based Ultramet Inc. (www.ultramet.com), to develop the alloy metal foams for its battery's internal structure.
Fraunhofer operates dozens of technical institutes in Germany and the United States with well over 8,000 employees that focus on the adoption and advancement of cost-effective new technologies to increase competitiveness and promote economic growth.
The successful production and delivery of these materials for the internal structure of Power Technology's economical and lightweight battery can now facilitate beta testing of vehicular batteries under industry standards. The Company's battery technology features significantly higher power density than standard batteries.
"Power Technology's mandate is to strategically ally itself with companies considered leaders in their respective fields," stated Lee Balak, president of Power Technology. "The excitement of participating in ground-breaking advances in foam metallurgy and working with Fraunhofer's distinguished group of Ph.D.s has our laboratory team in Las Vegas and our industrial partner, Douglas Battery (www.douglasbattery.com) of Winston-Salem, N.C., feverishly seeking the most cost-effective process to bring our product to market."
Power Technology, Inc. is a Las Vegas-based technology development company, which holds several patents in the power generation and power storage fields, and is working to provide innovative and practical technology solutions for commercial, government and industrial applications worldwide.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0EIN/1999_Nov_10/57486657/p1/article.jhtml
Snaper didn't seem to have a problem with pwtc owning the patent when he stated this in a news release in Nov 10, 1999
"We anticipate that additional patents will be filed for the unique electrochemical aspects of our battery technology," stated Alvin Snaper, inventor and vice president of Power Technology. "However, the structural patent can be utilized to enhance the performance of conventional battery chemistries."
I have 400,000 shares that I bought knowing PWTC owned the patent. IMO Snaper was paid for several years for it. If Snaper ends up with the patent, IMO everyone that owns or has owned pwtc will be able to join in a class action against him. I WILL be one of them that joins! IMO pwtc paid money to BC Research to develop the battery. Snaper didn't! WE ALL DID! Why in the HELL should he walk away with the worth of PWTC? I say NO WAY!
P.S. Greek KISS OFF!
Is it now time for a shareholders class action law suite?
send me an email and tell me what you think.
logman_98@yahoo.com
Not me or anyone I have talked to?
No idea who is buying shares now?