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.
Ssangyong Motor Researchers Busted for Tech Leaks ...
"According to the prosecution, the seven leaked the “source code” for the hydraulic control unit of a hybrid vehicle to the Chinese company upon request from the Chinese senior researcher in July 2006."
http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=020000&biid=2009111249848
So, it really was just a software problem after all.
Not to belabor the point about the video...
but, I am wondering why the Torvec equipped race car in the video needs to run off the course on both showings of the left turn. Isn't this area to the right side of the track line an area that is out of bounds and to be used for a vehicle that is in an out of control situation? Wasn't the whole idea of the Torvec equipped race car to be able to pass on the inside of a turn? So why is the choice of video for the company contain shots of the car making two left turns at race speed with both shots not being able to stay on the track and not able to pass on the inside of a turn?
Now that's some marketing effort.
The RACE was the day after A-B Challenge...
"Based upon the previous day’s success, Phoenix Performance entered the IsoTorque equipped #32 Corvette into the National Auto Sports Association (NASA) race the following day."
The A-B Challenge was not a race; it was a testing event.
The driver for the race, Andrew Aquilante's, name and results do not appear in the picture of the standings in the Torvec web site.
In the results picture on the Torvec web site, which set of entries was it that displayed Torvec's equipment results? Can you let us know?
That all just seems a little confusing, but I'd be sure that you can clear that up.
I was pleased to see that the Iso-Torque trimmed some time off the lap time, but was just wondering exactly how much time it was that was trimmed. Can you let us know?
I was pleased to see that the race was won by the Torvec invention equipped entry, but was wondering if the other race car drivers had comparable experience. Can you let us know about that?
Torvec reported that they achieved the goal, but...
they only told us that what the goal was (as a range) and that they achieved it.
"Torvec’s goal was to have the IsoTorque reduce the lap times by ¾ - 1 second as compared to the limited slip which was achieved."
What was the actual result?
Did they get the 3/4 second reduction or the full second reduction?
How much safer is that time reduction?
Does trimming the time sell, or does safety sell?
When will this equipment be tested in a front wheel drive car?
Should we have to wait another four years for that?
This report was less uplifting and glowing than...
the one from four years ago. The Iso-Torque report from four years ago was one that stressed safety. The safety aspect was the ticket to commercialization at that time. Back on October 31, 2005 this is how they put it:
"I am sure you are wondering about the strategy Torvec is employing to market and commercialize the Iso-Torque differential. The KEY TO THE ENTIRE STRATEGY IS HIGHWAY SAFETY."
Here is a link to the strategy from four years ago.
http://torvec.com/messagefromceo103105.html
Now safety is just a passing thought as it is only mentioned as an additional item at the end of a list of more important benefits. Here is how management puts it now:
"We have demonstrated that the IsoTorque differential contributes significantly to the improved automotive handling and performance, efficiency and safety."
What is up with that? Is safety no longer the main focus for the commercialization effort for the Iso-Torque?
Next time you have to call the company, could you ask them?
Also, they failed to mention the experience of the other drivers that were in the race. Did the Iso-Torque equipped car compete against comparable drivers?
I think someone had to call the company...
and then decided to make a last minute $62 investment that moved the market on this stock by 17% for an additional $3 Million dollar plus market cap increase.
But of course, you are right, even that is not a giant step forward.
Negative assurance is always difficult to present ...
but, since you insist, I'll take a shot.
Fact: Torvec has articulated a number of times exactly what it would take to allow a commercialization event.
There was the infamous "Anatomy of a Deal" discussion, there was the school bus quantification of a deal, there was the private shareholder's meeting discussion, there was the discussion and voting at the shareholder's meeting of the anticipated stock price produced by planned events, and of course there were other discussions with less details such as the coming of a watershed event. Need I go on? (There are other examples, of course)
Well, one could notice a pattern here if you were to think about it. The pattern is (IMO) one of a "big splash" "one shot" kind of a mentality. That is one of the consistent things in the whole plan right from the beginning.
The actual opportunities that Torvec has had for a commercialization event have never been worthy of a decision to commercialize an invention up to this point.
So, (IMO) this is why there has been a decision "not to commercialize". (IMO) once they have a worthy deal to consider and until and unless the "splash" can be of a substantial enough size they will continue to decide to wait.
Of course, there is one other thing; you seem to be confused about the concept of "desire to commercialize being absent when there is a decision not to commercialize". The desire can always be (and in this case always is) present even when there is a decision not to.
Does that help?
Ok, here, I'll try a different approach ...
I was just trying to point out the obvious which is that it is very unlikely that a group of disgruntled shareholders will be able to make a change in management.
Your use of the word hobby is one that is from your perspective as an investor. Certainly the inventors' perspective of a hobby activity is different from the investor's perspective. This difference between the perspectives does not qualify the activity as a hobby for the inventor even though it seems that way to the average investor.
At best, the understanding of the inventor's perspective by the investor (in this case) has been damaged by the periodic exuberant reports of morsels of good news that have been taken out of proportion and or context by the investor.
Of course, none of this damage of the understanding was necessary and could have been prevented.
There is no need to repeat the excerpt...
that you posted as it is part of the link that was my response to you. The entire Torvec website substantiates the decision that they have made not to commercialize the IVT at this time.
This section that you mentioned is not even the views of the company. They are the views of Hodges Transportation.
Big deal, there are evaluations going on, there are stages to go through, there are phone calls to be taken, there are progress reports that will be received shortly, and Torvec is happy with the relationship. To top that all off, there is a domestic OEM that is willing to ask Torvec to purchase a new piece of equipment to provide the data that the OEM needs.
Silly isn't it that Torvec could not even anticipate the need for the data source and get the new piece of equipment in anticipation of that need and have the data ready before they even asked for it. What an amazing surprise that must have been.
These are all items that support the conclusion that they have decided not to commercialize the IVT at this time. They are waiting for the right time and when it comes, they will do it. I suspect that we longs will all be happy when that happens.
Questions: What was the stock price on July 01, 2009? What is the stock price today? That change in the market place for the price of the stock reflects the public’s interpretation of the truth which you profess to have knowledge of.
I disagree with you about the part where...
you referred to them not wanting to. I believe that they want to commercialize it, but just decided not to. I think that they are attempting continuously to make it better; to make a bigger splash on pricing and all. After all, If they can make it better so easily, then so can others. The finished project is what they are after, and it isn't finished. Well, that's the way I see it.
I also disagree about the hobby part. That kind of talk is nasty and some may have reasons to be that way, but it really is unnecessary. We might want to concern ourselves with the things that we can change here which just happen to be practically nothing. Else, we might be considered to be the ones with a hobby.
Sure, the link for that statement is...
Torvec.com
After reviewing the entire matter the only logical conclusion for not commercializing the IVT is that they decided not to.
In order for you to believe it, you would have to review all the history with an open mind.
Try this; How do you think that Bill Gates would have done if he needed to perfect his invention to the status of Windows 7 prior to commercializing it?
Can't you see that this is part of what is happening here?
Torvec keeps on improving the IVT invention prior to commercializing it and thus never actually commercialize it.
It has to do with the fear of failure.
Also, you are wrong when you say "When I get time I will have to call the company."; you should have said that "I will call the company when I have time."
Now, if you have to call the company, I would like to know why.
"First and Only Positively Engaged, Infinitely Variable Transmission"
Look how they are planning to market this one.
http://www.pr.com/press-release/189937
It is really too bad that Torvec decided not to commercialize their IVT.
Why was that any way?
Did it really not work?
" Time for a new doctor. " ?...
Didn't you mean to say; Time for a transplant?
"This fall, Petrenko will test a modified version...
of the tech on an Audi A8 that he expects will de-ice its windshield in two to four seconds."
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2009-10/ice-breaker
It might be close to the right time to repossess the technology.
My glee was limited to the statement made...
"I am not at all sure that the technology was not in the JLTV."
He seemed to be so sure about things in the Binghamton area that I just had to ask about his level of assurance.
When he disclosed that he was not sure, it really was a relief.
Thanks for reminding us of the profit power of the relationship that is being developed at Lockheed. After all this time, I think that some of us began to forget about just how significant this will be once Lockheed is selected for the JLTV project. If Torvec's inventions perform well in the JLTV then we can expect to be rewarded for hanging in there.
Your "bottom line" conclusion fails to consider the...
following obvious facts:
1) Lockheed Martin features "Variable ride-height suspension" that can be facilitated by Torvec's CV Joint.
2) Lockheed Martin's JLTV drive trains are provided by ArvinMeritor which would have relationships and components that the Investor Relations department at Lockheed would not be informed about.
3) Lockheed Martin has not commercialized the JLTV as of yet, it is still being developed and tested.
You may be exactly correct, but at this point your conclusion is merely a prediction.
I was really hoping that you would say...
that.
Thanks.
I just tried to avoid you the embarrassment...
of mentioning that other department (investor relations) which you though was a superior point of information of what was happening on the production floor.
That "fact" was amusing at the time and even more so now.
I think it was my children who mention shipping and receiving.
From a practical standpoint, it really does not...
matter what is causing the layoffs, however I think that you are wrong about that. As an investor, there is nothing we can do about the layoffs. However, it is very sad that all this technology and invention potential is being delayed while there is the need and the plant is ready and the labor force is standing by ready and able.
How sure are you that Torvec technology is not in the JLTV? I know that others have said the same when clerks were contacted in the shipping / receiving and other departments. The way I had it figured is that they wouldn't necessarily know as the drive trains come from a different company. If Torvec was working with that other company (ArvinMeritor), the staff in Owego wouldn't necessarily know these details.
"announced today: the hydraulic hybrid technology it developed...
in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other partners will be put into full service at the Port Authority of New York - New Jersey terminal at the conclusion of its development testing. The technology is installed on a yard hostler, a type of vehicle used in moving freight containers in marine ports, rail yards, distribution centers and warehouses. It is the first real-world use of hydraulic hybrid technology in this type of vehicle."
"The hydraulic hybrid technology is one of the world's most efficient and cost-effective powertrain technologies, and, in EPA testing, has shown a fuel economy improvement of 50-70 percent, along with a 30-40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, depending on the vehicle."
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/epa-hydraulic-hybrid-yard-hostler-featuring-fev-developed-technology-to-be-put-into-service-for-first-time-64515572.html
However, there is no need to be concerned about Torvec's technologies not being commercialized (is there?) because Jim says "who says it isn't in there".
If it is true that the bulk of...
these layoffs are due to Obama cutting the Presidential helicopter program (and maybe you have a news item that specifically mentions that); then why wouldn't Obama move these people over to the JLTV program.
Do they not have JLTV skills?
Why would Obama do that to Hillary’s effort to set up a partnership?
Torvec's partner, Lockheed Martin Systems Integration - Owego...
while having a little trouble with the JLTV program...
"Announced layoffs at Lockheed Martin Systems Integration - Owego, BAE Systems and Vail-Ballou, which total approximately 1,200 lost jobs, will have a more profound on unemployment figures for October, November and December, he said."
http://www.pressconnects.com/article/20091015/BUSINESS/910150353/Binghamton+region+jobless+climbs++manufacturing+continues+to+plunge
Could someone call Hillary's replacement?
For those interest in IVT's and Tracked vehicles...
here is the latest one to be commercialized.
"And for the first time ever, John Deere makes its Infinitely Variable Transmission (IVT) available on 8RT Series Track Tractors."
http://www.farmnews.co.nz/news/2009/feb/444.shtml
Wasn't Torvec going to commercialize a tracked vehicle with an infinitely variable transmission?
What happened to that thought?
Of course if Torvec commercialized its patented technologies...
the world could have a retrofitable hydraulic propulsion system for large vehicles that would save a large percentage of energy costs such as the competition like Recaptured Energy Technologies (RET), that:
"have a retrofitable hydraulic propulsion system for large vehicles that stores energy in hydraulic cylinders with compressed gas. The vehicle, such as a city bus, then uses that stored energy to give it a boost when starting up. The technology is known as RPS, or Retrofitable Propulsion System, and reduces fuel use by 25 percent and emissions by 25 percent."
http://gas2.org/2009/10/16/recaptured-energy-technologies-partners-with-ricardo-on-green-solutions/
It seems like the school bus program may end up with a provider of technology after all.
Torvec has numerous patents on Hydraulic Hybrid components...
but unable to commercialize any of them, while, for example:
Parker Hannifin Corporation (NYSE: PH), the global leader in motion and control technologies, today announced initial commercial commitment for its new series hydraulic hybrid system, which is designed to completely replace the traditional drive train on delivery vehicles and has yielded significantly increased fuel efficiency and reduced carbon emissions.
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS158956+16-Oct-2009+PRN20091016
But of course, who says it isn't in there?
Here is a little update while we wait...
"Academic-business collaborations are already producing results in New York state alone:
* Rochester Institute of Technology's partnership with Delphi Automotive of Rochester will help develop fuel-cell technology for military vehicles."
http://www.stargazette.com/article/20091013/VIEWPOINTS02/910130303/1121/Partners+in+energy+efficiency
Enter... Matthew H. Fronk
By getting some light shed on the watershed...
would be a good so the shareholders can avoid having to live in a shed.
A successful job search mandates perfect "corporate speak"...
while searching at that level, doesn’t it? So there will not be any need to write anything off. Another quality is the ability and willingness to stick with the corporate mission. The ability to stick with the inferior hydrogen fuel cell technology mission while, just down the road, SOFC technology was so superior and advancing so rapidly; is a noticeable dedication. Wrap it all together with some leadership and then you have something.
I just hope that all the dots come together.
"Lockheed rules out vehicle malfunction in JLTV rollover"...
"the accident, which occurred when a cable TV news reporter who was driving made a turn at the bottom of a hill on the company's test course."
http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20091009/BUSINESS/910090350/Lockheed+Martin+rules+out+vehicle+malfunction+in+summer+s+JLTV+rollover
Hey; has anyone (other than me) considered that the cable TV news reporter actually was "paid handsomely" to pull off this event?
There is a motivating factor for a payment to be made.
(An opportunity to participate in a 10 Billion dollar contract)
Was there ever any confirmation as to the inclusion of Torvec's CV Joints and or the Iso-Torque differentials in this vehicle?
"The Lockheed Martin-BAE team delivered three prototype JLTVs to the Army led program with variable ride-height suspension, a unique hull design and lightweight armor composites."
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3327205&c=LAN&s=TOP
Wasn't the Lockheed "variable ride-height suspension" enhanced with Torvec's CV Joint, or has that also been ruled out?
Here's a good way to look at failure...
In "a very unusual category of recognitions called “Dare to Try” in its groupwide Tata Innovista program. Under this category , company managers and teams are encouraged to send in entries for innovations that were attempted, but which failed to get to the marketplace for one reason or another."
"In one year, the winner was the TMETC (Tata Motors Engineering Technical Centre, UK), which failed to develop-to-market an innovative IVT (infinitely variable transmission) for the Nano car. Within the tight timelines, TMETC could not deliver a target cost and performance-effective product. “The team does not consider their IVT endeavour a failure....TMETC and Tata Motors fought a good fight—and won more than it lost,” reported the internal publication."
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/features/corporate-dossier/Encourage-creative-errors-to-foster-spirit-of-risk-taking/articleshow/5104324.cms
Here's the latest application for Torvec's CV Joint...
In addition to decreasing the turning radius for vehicles;
In addition to "variable ride height";
In addition to unique power shaft angles in buses;
Here is the latest application that has been coming like a freight train down a track.
"Nissan to show half-width 'Land Glider' tilting electric vehicle at Tokyo Motor Show"
http://www.gizmag.com/nissanland-glider-car-motorcycle-electric-tokyo-motor-show/13064/
Finally, tilt wheel, means more than just adjusting the steering wheel for comfort.
This should bring down the pricing on motorcycle tires.
Thanks for being the one who was able...
to graciously point that out. I was really thinking the same thing. Must be "Dot Connecting" is a more common past time than we first thought; and it is a good thing that there is nothing else to do here but past the time.
I know that is true for some of the...
shareholders, and that is why I tried to exclude them from my discussion aboout the ones that might be impressed with Mr. Fronk's new job.
The ones that are looking for a little love can greet him at the door with a bunch of roses.
"In a statement, Fronk said he was “very excited to be joining RIT and look forward to working with the dedicated faculty, staff and researchers at CIMS and the Golisano Institute to enhance the development and ultimate commercialization of a host of alternative transportation technologies.” "
http://rocnow.com/article/business/200991006016
The shareholders that wanted a Big 3 executive...
to become involved with Torvec, should now be happier as...
"RIT lands leader of GM fuel cell research".
How could a GM executive get any closer to Torvec without walking through the door?
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20091007/BUSINESS/910070325/1001
Since RIT and Delphi have been working together for years on Fuel Cells, and this executive is from the GM Fuel Cell Division, and he is determined at "the RIT center" that they "can help start to connect the dots for some of these things."
I think that we will see the SOFC technology further developed at RIT, and that technology will be merged with all of Torvec's inventions into a commercialized vehicle that will be powered at least in part by the SOFC. I think that Matthew H. Fronk has discovered that the hydrogen fuel cell that he was working on is inferior to the Delphi SOFC and because of that he moved up to RIT where the SOFC technology is being researched.
I also think that it is interesting that all of this is happening on the day of or the day after Delphi comes out of bankruptcy.
Yes, that's true, most of the comments about...
the Torsen 2 that were mentioned by him earlier are exactly correct, as I previously tried to point out in this earlier message of mine.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42010764
The incorrect point was that it was the Torsen 2 that was developed for use on Toyota Motor Corporation’s Lexus IS-F.
As we can see there now is a new version of the Torsen. (It will be a little bit difficult to Goggle it, as it was only announced on Tuesday of this week.) (Also, you can take your time, as HQ said in the RBJ that it should take less than five years.)
The real point here is that this new version is now both:
the "#1 Selling Feature: Compact full-traction "torsen" differential ...
and "The Torsen LSD is the main drawcard to the updated IS F"
............
May I remind you that a differential that is the main selling feature of anything and the main draw card for anything is one of the reasons that we all invested in Torvec.
While updating the due diligence file please consider...
http://www.jtekt.co.jp/e/company/news/20090929.html
??? So, this is this a Torsen 2 ???
Somehow, I don't think so.
What was the Torvec "relationship with Toyota" ?...
All I remember was two relationships:
One (currently) being the "ability to level the playing field for companies that compete with" them (Toyota). (Which really isn't much of a relationship)
The other was that Toyota was a customer of the original versions of the Torsen differentials and then Toyota later acquired the ownership of that original technology (actually this item was prior to the inception of Torvec and therefore was a relationship with the people that formed Torvec into a corporation).
Was there something esle?
I really don't want you to become anxious...
over this matter; in theory the answer should simply be:
the Torvec "Patented gear tooth design"
Of course, that would all be fine if...
they were using and talking about the Torsen2.
However, they are using the new upgraded compact Torsen Limited-Slip Differential.
Keep in mind that the Iso-Torque is also a Torsen differential and it is new, upgraded and also a compact differential.
So, what is the difference between the one that they are speaking of and the Iso-Torque?
Until today, that was only a rumor, now...
how can you speak of the announcement of the addition of mechanical LSD to the V8 sports sedan in the "past tense" when mentioning its commercialization?
So, the math is still sort of equal, but there may be a difference soon if our management team delays much longer.
Another interesting tidbit is that Torvec just race track tested their Iso-Torque in a product line that has been discontinued (Pontiac). The "rather dim" bright side is that Cadillac reportedly utilizes the same Pontiac differential set up for two of the Cadillac models.