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.
Wanderport Corp called to defend itself as a named party has been abundantly clear all along - something to which this board has had an amazing amount of blindness.
Posted many times, "I am not seeing them defend themselves" and "heading toward a default judgement"
I have the impression Wanderport the company is either extremely ignorant of the allegations or the company (all 2, 3, or ? individuals composing it) does not care.
Another reason to be glad to watch from the sidelines.
been there, done that, at least that is my impression from the response from Robert a couple days after I had said, two or three times, the same thing "why can they not provide patent numbers and jurisdiction info"
The response from Robert was to decline to provide any patent information, saying he felt it best for all IP related disclosures to happen under the schedule of the patenting agency and not unnecessarily risk disclosing anything before that time.
That was one of the flags making me glad I had taken my cash off the table on this one.
. . . and was it not Andrew that "found" Robert for Wanderport back when Wanderport was an empty shell looking for a purpose ?
I could not answer either. Posed rhetorically to point out that there is more than just establishing efficiency. At this point the only thing I am seeing as a benefit (within electric tankless) of microwave heating is the ability to respond rapidly. If they come in requiring high amperage 220V (250V world) their market share for hone sales imo plummets. Might not be much of an issue in industrial applications, but the new wiring for a home placement would greatly reduce sales. If efficiency is more like the slashdot discussion (my earliest post today), i.e. not there, industrial applications would be restricted to where fast response is of value, but then one would be talking large water volume and correspondingly large numbers of magnetrons, probably at 660V or above.
Just trying to understand if there really is a market.
I am with you on that assessment (and about the xs reposts in full of old PRs recently)
As you can tell, I may be out, but I am still watching WDRP (old habits die hard )
If we believe Richard there is a mufti-cavity unit 3 weeks from Aug 3, so like 9 days out; if we go with Robert somewhere around then he is back in North America and close to being in receipt of some needed parts.
In the meantime, will there be any news ? I tend to think things might not hold together that long without something positive.
Sure looks like fraud, ey?
Thanks for reminding us of the past PR claims BeerIsGood (yes!!)
It seems there are two choices (extending into 2011 btw with the PR about filing for the third patent)
1) PR is overstated if not intending to create false perception, enough to think it fraudulent
or
2) Management is extremely out of touch with its business and its timings, enough to call it mismanagement
Either is not good, and nothing is setting things right at this point.
not quite so easy
Can it regulate the energy transfer? ex. not boil the water even if locally in one area, which would probably tend to make things explode.
Can it regulate the energy transfer? ex. not overdraw the magnetron making it short, potentially exposing those in contact with water to 1000's of volts.
Can it deliver consistent temperature, even as rates of water flow change?
There is actually a sizable list, and yes, overall efficiency is also a big one, which the company has disclosed nothing other than the hand-waving done on everything else.
I see the great debate continues, lol
I have not posted here for what, two weeks ? and the non-existence of patents is still a topic ! My, my.
Sorry to everyone that had PM'd me then, didn't seem right to respond in public posts and could not PM (free account).
A number of people asked what numbers I had used in my pps estimate. I intended to reply (and do now post it at bottom), but frankly the markets have been so active, and hidig oversolds, I have barely thought of the WDRP board, sorry (but see at end anyway).
But I have watched the WDRP pps, and I have noticed continued decline in volume, heck last week the stink bids at 0.015 (or where they serious intending reasonable offer) were actually at the top of the bids for a while. Wonder how much that is impact of Andrew and his cronies not trading ?
I saw the "news release" where Richard gave the pep-talk, got a laugh when I read his saying that there would be a working unit in seemed to me a timeframe before Robert said the parts would get to him - imagine there is another PR in a week or ten days saying there would be (another) delay due to parts delivery timing.
I still have not seen anything about the company defending itself (recall, the company is named in the AMF initiated thing) in the CA courts. Not good. AIUI that will result in a default judgement against them (but then again, what can they do without money?)
Well, I am not posting to taunt, but to add something.
This is very old, back when Pulsar was first surfacing with the idea of microwave heating of water. There is a lot of guesswork in the thread, but also some decent engineering arguments, which to me bring the entire idea of microwave H2O heating seem more questionable than I had previously considered.
http://science.slashdot.org/story/05/11/25/0413215/Company-Develops-Microwave-powered-Water-Heater
After reading the /. thread I am now questioning even the optimistic pps estimate after (if) product is being shipped as the /. discussion makes me question if the energy efficiencies claimed will actually even turn out to be real.
So good luck to the gang of longs. Happily cashed out here, WDRP did me well, although I had hoped for better.
Later
So, some asked how I got to the pps I was saying would be nowhere near as high as I was hearing as the moderate, not even the optimistic, but the moderate guesses. As I am a mathematician (MA degree) I really had only ballparked up some numbers in the background while doing other things. But I recreate it for you along these lines.
start with $1billion +/- $200 million sales in the first 5 years
so that is
800m - 1200m sale range
(note that at $500 cost per, which is close to the number they had used, that is saying 2 million units +/- 20% per year; going from zero to 175,000 +/- units per month)
now assume sales start out great and ramp up from there, so I use 75% of yearly average for yr 1 and 125% for yr 5
yr 1 - yr 5
(600-900) (1000-1500) sale distrib weight 0.75 to 1.25
but for simplicity I then use the low value of yr 1 and high of yr 5 as I really only am interested mostly in the full range of possibles, so
600m - 1500m
now, give a very generous net margin of 10% to 20%, after all expenses, not just manufacturing costs
(60m,120m) - (150m,300m) 15% +/- 5% margin
take this to per yr numbers
(12m, 24m) - ( 30m, 60m) per yr
and assume they get to pay back the existing debt over 2.5 yrs
(10m, 22m) - ( 30m, 60m) per yr - 2m (debt 5m/2.5yr)
now, to per share, using 640m shares, assuming 0 dilution over 5 yr
(0.0156, 0.0368) - (0.0469, 0.0938)
* P/E multiply by your believe P/E, which of course will be impacted by a number of things, psychological and momentum based as the product(s) become more recognized and penetrate more markets. So there is roughly the background headwork I was seeing, and I think it is exceedingly generous, especially in the early year or two, and not at all cautious and conservative. Keep in mind, that yr 1 number is for after one year of sales, the year 5 number is for status at end of their projected 5 years. Sorry, but I just don't see the numbers people have been talking about (if there is eventually a product - to me a very real question at this time).
Like I said, good luck to the die-hard longs. I do hope to rejoin you at some point, as I said WDRP has returned me a bit more than +300% gain over the most seed money I ever had at risk, so I would be down to reenter if I saw there was something beyond smoke and mirrors, but right now the company has not impressed me in how it has failed to handle this, and the timeline for the first 2 of the 3 claimed patents should be far enough back that they should show to the searches, but . . . the list is too long, hence risk off here.
Later and good luck all
No new negative developments I am aware of, but good question.
I have chalked it off to the general market, potential for demand downturn, people hunting money from what is not in immediate position to pop up. I have held free shares for a year plus so not troubled by this down swing, probably a long time before back around the 0.5 tops but only good news imo over recent quarters. It hasn't been this cheap for quite a while. Long term they have good properties and sizable part of financing in place for the Brazilian efforts, and they finally have upped to 100% on Northern Dancer. The one thing I have noticed with Largo in the couple years I have tracked/held is that it does not have many fast price swings, mostly long gradual trends with someone occasionally taking an interest in acquiring a large position. They are not news producers, but are tracking for a couple milestones late this year. The fairly fast drop over the past week+ is imo the market for commodity, i.e. non-gold, metal producer equities.
sums up a lot, just don't forget that
no problem
my bad on Li Lee, just a quick misread as I was posting and peeking back at some saved files. I did not however revisit the conf call to check the Pt+Au vs PGM+Au, like I said, assumed it was same as the existing NI43-101. I did look at sedar and did not see any filing of major holdings in NKL in the June-now timeframe. I am very new to iHub, but not PCY, watched it after it cam on my Mongolia screen and finally nibbled after the power plant licensing, hence I ended up with NKL. I am still pondering why PCY did not transfer all Ni and PGM property in the spin-off.
The one thing that prior posts, your's or mine, did not mention is the Os+Ir+Rh+Ru values. I hope they do have analyses ongoing and will include in new NI43-101. Seems I recall seeing mention of total g/t comparable to the g/t for PGM+Au, which could potentially double the values.
first their website shows 59,483,664 fully diluted, 20% more than you used. next, in the conf call I really noticed that they said they had only two million cash, only enough for operations through September if I am recalling correctly, so does that sound like dilution ahead? I guess if that was too little, Prophecy Resources would have included more than the $2 M that they did in the transaction (?) At least there are prior workings. Also, not sure your $1500 per oz PGM+Au is valid, isn't that estimate including the Pd ?
Maybe I was just not listening closely, assumed same as in the NI43-101 ? Speaking of listen, you are talking about the conf call back in late July, right ?
All that said, yes, there is something about the too good to be true, but I noticed that nearby juniors Carabou Copper Resources and Alix Resources staked the ground from their option holds up to the border of Wellgreens property.
Even working with the existing NI43-101, and you can't really question the company they employed for it, that 12 M oz total indicated and inferred. So, reducing from your numbers to about 1/4 the ozs, $17 B, and reducing to say $1000/oz so thats 2/3 of $11 B, and reducing to 5/6 to get the shares right around $10 B, one gets around $166/share undiscounted for the existing NI43-101 prior to cap ex dilution. All very ball-park, but that's saying today's pps is saying around 2% of the known is market.
It will be interesting ride. My Prophecy Pt is from the spinout so I guess I am just in for the ride.
Where are you finding the insider purchase info for Prophecy Pt ?
PS. seems people are overlooking Victory Ni holding so much of both Prophecies, sort of like Prop. Coal getting overlooked in the initial run of Prop. Pt.
PPS it is Li not Lee
Thx PR Ed
So that xs supply of Mn for Fe implies that if AMY doesn't go after the entire value chain it will only realistically have a buyer for concentrate to the US strategic stockpile, ey?
I liked the 83 million lb/acre giant high grade rock story better, more grins. (someone should introduce those guys to geophysics
water - new drills - pps etc.
looks like .spx punched 1250 pretty strongly today - not sure if the general momentum or a short call forced the AMY AMXZF dip, or if the, what seemed to me, less than spectacular MN grade/widths reported today had some impact . . .
For Chris/Stockwatch
I do not really follow water permits and frankly was not aware of any granted or refused for Alamo water.
I was quite interested in your interpretation of the hydro-metallurgy - I need to dig into that as I had only done a quick revview, probably of some pre-digested secondary posting - but I had assumed there was first a concentration step for the < 10% friable raw strip from the select layers, with the concentrate then moving to the sulfurous/sulfuric extraction. So I had it as the vast bulk would merely be wet, with no chemical composition change other than reduction in MN and other heavies content plus possibly/probably wetting - hopefully a simple aqueous flowsheet.
With the waste as you indicate treated with acid, there is a whole different range of things, like rinsing and acid neutralization of vast tonnage before replacement in the stripped areas, etc.. I had really though the acid solvent extracton of the tetravalent MN was only done to the concentrate. Guess that shows you how much time I have spent looking into the planned processes.
On the Alamo Lake front, I was commenting more from the general scarcity of H2O and the eco perspectives. As the AZ population boomed the mentality has definitely entered a transition from the old 4 Cs (copper,cotton,citrus,cattle) that pretty much dominated politics, through the period of developers, and to increasing "preserve what we moved here for" expression. It can be seen in a number of areas, but a big one in recent years is protection of the very few desert riparian area.
You might find of some limited interest the Alamo Lake data used as a case study for a (then) new approach to reservoir management in
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA391009
Hopefully the post strings in that are not specific to my session, if so, try searching for "Resolving Conflict Over Reservoir Operation" an Army Corp of Engg doc. There is nothing in the case study about water withdrawal expect to meet the habitat preservation requests of the different agencies.
Are you aware of the AZ Dept of Water Resources ?
www.azwater.gov ? try simple search on Alamo Lake
You might also want find interest in the statewide water atlas
http://www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/StatewidePlanning/WaterAtlas/
used for planning
wonder if there is more than reporter speculation here
understatement there, I had thought the dip just before the president's commments might be a low for the day - with .DJI briefly ducking under 12000 - luck with that as .SPX now plays with the 1264 level.
I have seen the new x-post from Chris on stockwatch, but a little preoccupied at the moment, so deferring continuing that discussion for the moment.
On the other hand AMY doesn't seem to be straying far from its recent pps and volume trend in what looks like a very selective day for the resource sector.
Later
Hey, if it made it on to my radar, which is pretty faulty, I would imagine it is not being overlooked.
If it came to Wanderport patent(s) being infringed, even if you are in the right if you cannot out-spend a big legal budget . . .
I am looking at the projected sales, dividing to annual (which overstates the early years) subtracting out the 4.7 accumulated debt, using a net margin of 15% +/- 5%, dividing by current OS and multiplying by a range of P/E ratios, and there really isn't all that much upside, ten bagger from the current 3s on a lucky day.
Anyone else tried the numbers game ?
Yes, of course that is what was meant - i.e. need to pay for the prior arts use if still under patent protection. Also I was moving toward the question of what gross margin might be on units, rather than looking at projected distributor costs of units.
Agreed, about proper patent research. Having applications well researched and prepared before submission is all-important. The track record does not look so good there. But in Robert's lengthy reply he did indicate that one of the things he was looking for from Wanderport was covering the costs of doing IP protection. Maybe it is only a hope that that happened but just did not show up in the Q2 financial report.
Actually, my interest in the birth of Wanderport is solely to help assess the current state of things. I have had the same gut level idea that you expressed, that at some point it looked to the players like the better course would be to try to take this all the way to product/market.
However, I have also salted that with the "buy-out" pattern this crew has also apparently perfected.
On your point 1) I agree for the most part with how you have laid it out. That is probably a large part of the delay to multi-cavity, to attempt to get strong claims in the new patent applications.
The part you do not mention that does concern me, for whatever company might end up bringing this to market, is how much of the prior art is still under patent protection (and so subject to royalty or licensing payments as part of bring out the newer, extending the art, product ?
And, why does Andrew so often appear to be running things in the early days ?
Funny. Glad you see that much margin (oil futures included?)
BTW value1008 I did not start the water discussion, just responded.
I did mention trucking water, maybe not all the way from the bottler
But seriously, if AMY in worse case had to end up buying some land up and transferring outtake location for, some CAP (Central Arizona Project) canal water, which is relatively a neighbor, the environmental groups could possibly see that, local area aquifer recharge, as a major positive side-effect from the project.
lol you sure that was in 96 ?
I have assumed the multicavity approach is superior for a number of reasons, as Water Boy postulated for efficiency (switch on only 2, or all 4, or . . . as needed), for costs (smaller magnetrons are cheaper), for better mixing (the wavelength on microwave causes water molecules to spin, this must degrade into lateral and/or vibratory motion to effect temperature increase), better energy transfer (irradiate multiple smaller spaces instead of more heavily irradiate one larger space, as larger is needed to effect full absorption of the higher energy amonut), to prepare for other markets (multiple points to tap outflow water at different temperatures), and perhaps most importantly to allow for more aspects that are beyond prior art.
In all due respect, everything related to the AMF allegations and the origin of Wanderport is very much ON TOPIC
What is not appreciated is all of the rehashing of the known.
Agreed. Watching WDRP this and coming weeks will be interesting.
I for one appreciate your efforts lexit
The long email from Robert was very nice, and informative.
I have never felt he was up to anything other than trying to get a product to market as best it can be. I just hope he does better with the patent writing this time
As for the email from Richard, I wish it had made me feel any better, as it seemed to be the minimum needed to keep things from tanking this week, more of the old cheerleader tone all over it.
WDRP will be an interesting watch - I am still on the sidelines, and glad - in fact have not even wanted to put in stink bids.
Today the volume looks pretty anemic to me, once you take "the gang of longs" early actions out of the picture.
Nice x-post from Chris/Stockhouse, thanks value
You notice, twice I indicated that I did not believe AMY would have gone down this road if they felt water sufficiency would be a show stopper.
What I actually said about the mention of water recovery seen in the old working's audit from their withdrawal for drilling was to the effect that I have not seen any numbers on tests for draw-down and recovery rates, which I feel would have to happen before anyone could speculate on the adequacy of that as a water source. The water needs for a couple of drill rigs is pretty minor compared to likely range of operational needs.
Chris seems to have seen info on the AMY projected water consumption level which I have not, hence I only said AMY likely has alternatives to minimize water needs in the raw concentration phase.
All that said, I still am of the opinion that AMY would face some fairly strong contests over using Alamo Lake. The historic numbers are one thing, the numbers covering the past decade plus of drought are likely quite different. Even with the locals in favor, this would be a state issue, and the local population is probably around 0.001% of the state if not less. If AMY employs in the projected range, most of the people would be commuting. It would be ecological interests that would tie up use of Alamo water in a lengthy process, and I would be surprised at not seeing that happen. I cannot image AMY has failed to play out all of these scenarios and seen a green light in all events.
At any rate, good information from Chris.
So Frankkfurt should be closed ey ? Anyone have volume numbers out of the Eruo area ?
Tell me that Martel finally realized he had to make a statement if he wanted to have a company with any sort of market cap after another week. It should not have taken ten days (from the AMF report) for someone ta stand up for the image of the company. The jury is still out.
Sure, as a chemist (among other things) I am aware that the invention of the microwave oven was based entirely upon selecting the wavelength that makes water molecules spin
The ceramic coffee cup just does not have as many.
What better heating source could one select for a water heater !
I would love to see a microwave based tankless water heater. Compact, convenient to prep a spot to install, minimal hot water line lengths, etc.
For Wanderport the problem seem to be that they may be facing some licensing and/or royalty issues for that part of their product.
Comment is based on the citations of the international claims search report that seemed to show there is non-expired patent on that.
efficiency is only part of the equation
there is convenience - electric can mount most anywhere, gas requires venting and gas piping
on efficiency it is all about how much of the input energy value ends up in the thermal capacity of the exiting water
with gas there is a lot wasted up the exhaust
with conventional electric elements there is a different percentage of electric flow that does not end up as heat out of the elements than there is for microwave that does not end up as radiation out of the magnetron, plus the microwaves are almost fully absorbed by the water heating it whereas with conventional electric elements there is some heat that just radiates out to the enclosure and does not get transferred to the water.
To me the convenience factor is a major plus, and if a unit could be brought out that does not need 220V wiring, even better.
all depends on number of shares, and move +100% or > -50% or 0%
Wanderport - are you listening at all ?
one more week, one more month, . . .
How long will Wanderport delay things ?
More than a month for parts ? or for money for parts ? or to get out of Dodge ? or . . .
Wanderport - provide proof that there are 3 valid, current microwave technology based water heater patents held by the company and/or its licensor Robert S - whether granted or in application - proof that is verifiable, patent numbers, under what name, in what country. The PR stated three patents now - prove it
Just what does Martel do ? I have been trying to figure this. If Robert meets the potential distributors and establishes the relationships, and he manages the development, what does Martel do? Clearly no effort is needed to keep the books - zero revenue last quarter, and zero overheads (not even one cent for office/headquarter overheads. So what material, demonstrable thing did Martel do let us say A[ril - Aug 2011 ?
Oh, almost forgot, Wanderport you must clearly distance the company from Andrew, and also, quite urgently as I understand the default judgement timeline you must legally defend the company in Canada where the company has also been named as implicated in this affair.
On the tankless market:
One gets what one pay for. For me electricity is way cheaper than than gas, as the only thing left for gas is H2O heater, and house heater about 40 days per year. So for 320 days water heater cost is very high, with the minimum service and connect chargers about 12 times the chage for the gas used.
I have shopped for tankless point-of-use for a long time. In the US the in-store (Lowes, Home Depot, etc.) prices for better models are in the range 350-500 which is apparently below Wanderport's estimated cost to distribution channel. I have been very excited for the microwave based as it appears the energy transfer is great and hightly efficient (Wanderport - where are the nummbers on the performance of this prototype?) but more importantly because of the complete isolation of the electrical components from the water. I do not want to go gas, looking at all electric with some on-grid solar by-down of electric costs. The electric point-or-use has much greater installation location flexibility, and the maintenance of the internals (descale, etc.) is easier than with a gas based heat transfer .
As far as I have determined when window shopping on point-of-use, tankless water heaters, for myself in the US, buying from Europe where the technology is much more established seemed to be my only real alternative.
ummmm I don't think so
Robert only holds pending US patents (applications) which can be found in the USPTO databases - that was my last link; and he has no granted patents - that was the second to the last link.
Robert holds no real deal granted patents under his name in the US.
The FAQ link you just posted is for the Patent Grants Database, which only shows granted patents; there is also the Patent Application Database, for pending patent applications.
IOW you used only the first USPTO database, not also the second USPTO database, which are both listed here:
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/search/index.jsp
We have been unable to find any patent, granted or in application process, for water heater related technology in US or International that is current (not withdrawn).
As I have repeatedly said, I wish it was otherwise, but it is what it is.
Hey value1008, most of my life has been as a vegetarian also, hence they are not my McDonalds either
The AZGS is a state agency, not part of the USGS. Yes, they work together very tightly. AZGS can issue drill permits for state land in AZ, USGS cannot do that for state land.
I have no doubt AMY has fully researched its water issues. I am not privy to what they are considering as flow-sheets, etc. for initial concentration, or any of the details. I do know there is near zero water out there. Whenever I venture out that way the cooler is full of my favorite chilled juices, some extra bottles are stuffed in the vehicle, and there is a 5 gallon water-cooler bottle in the far back as safety
There used to be a viable open-pit there. That tells you quite a bit about their being able to cope with the dry conditions. I believe there is no way they would have started on this if water was going to be a show stopper. It will be an expense large enough to have its own accounting entries however.
Thanks for all the work on the board. I will be around, been watching FMY too long to do otherwise.
Cheers
wish you were right on the patents
The patent link you posted goes to a pending patent application, not a registered patent
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20050151629.pdf
As I posted earlier
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=65697206
This link shows no granted patents in his name in the US
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3sdups6
which goes to
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2FSIMONEAU-ROBERT&d=PTXT
And this link shows 4 pending patent applications in his name in US, including as the first what you referred to as his registered patent.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4ykgt4r
which goes to
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2FSIMONEAU-ROBERT&d=PG01
I am no mining engineer.
I did not even notice when reviewing the NI43-101 that the claims were load claims. I guess I assumed the majority of the claims to be placer claims, with load claims only covering the vent pipes.
That does not really matter though. What is important is that AMY has consolidated the claims and fee lands for the entire area (currently being targeted) as was pointed out this morning.
I have no doubt that the costs of the resource is baked into the financials, probably some as fixed annual (fixed lease) and some as operational costs (royalty and resource depletion based lease).
Water is a BIG issue. That was one of my major red flags on the Artillery Peak project. The Bill Williams river and its Alamo Lake mentioned is probably never going to be available for them. For one thing it is a State Park. It is not huge (as most people think of a lake or reservoir in other parts of the world) and is one of the only water sources for the desert animals and to maintain the small amount of riparian habitat in that area of the Bill WIlliams. Lake's Lake which is mentioned should be thought of as a pond by standards used elsewhere. When I first came to AZ it did not take me long to find out that all these rivers on the map are ribbons of sand, and when running are more like creeks or stream (save for the floods - which is the majority of the time many of them have any above ground water, but those are usually called washes on the maps). Anyway, I cannot even understand why Alamo Lake or a pipeline from it was mentioned, it is such a long short.
I did look very closely at the disclosed process, and was glad to see that it seems it could be nearly closed cycle (ie. water used gets reused, to the extent it is not lost in the wet offtake products like the sodium sulphate mentioned as a marketable byproduct - yes, marketable - I think someone asked that this morning).
My bigger concern is the water for the initial separation and concentration step(s). We will need to watch the pre-feasibility study closely on this. With the volume of damp/wet waste material (what 95% + by dry weight that starts bone dry and leaves damp/wet) that would be a lot of water. The water for the final processing probably needs to be of good quality and much smaller amount. The water for the raw steps of any quality. They are probably looking at a large water volume being needed. But there is very little (even before global warming impacts) in the area. The mention of water in the deep audits on the patented ground is a hopeful sign, but I am still doubtful as they have done no tests of draw-down and recovery rates that I have seen published. A lot of "good" wells in that area don't reach very high in the gallons per minute and when they do there are all sorts of impacts on the region, hence environmental issues. Worse case they could even look at buying up some land for a couple 10s of million for their water rights if they could transfer the location of outtake from the Arizona Canal (carries water from Colorado River on west edge of AS to the central area of AZ) to somewhere nearby. But that said, at their current cost, the possibility of innovating dry separation techniques needing less water (dust control), trucking water, etc. I am pretty sure they would not be at this point and walking blind about the water needs issues. But, IMO the issues are very real, comparable to lack of infrastructure in the Yukon, and will be a line item expense.
Well, not sure if I covered all the inquiries I saw, maybe I got close. And of course, all in only my opinion. Maybe some day when the cooler weather arrives I will take a drive over and look around at the property - sounds like it has some interesting geology
Later, I will be around and see a lot of long-term in this play. Sure looked like adding the German exchange helped the pps and volume or was that just North Americans anticipating and preparing a welcome ?
One of my big issues is that when they announced filing the new patent application they said it would make three patents for their technology.
Where are the other two ? Surely they knew better.
That was not so very long ago (remember hitting 0.06 again finally after the fall from 0.08, or was that when we first hit 0.08 - so many ups and downs it gets hard to recall)
I look forward to your summary of communications with Robert. Thanks for doing that.
Correct. As mentioned before, perhaps the new patent application has learned from the earlier failures and is presenting the multi-cavity heater so that it does not make claims already made by others, that it shows novelty and advancement of the art.
A new patent application could then have a chance.
However:
- we have not found any such application filed under Robert's name
- given the conflicts in claims found in the international patent application review, it appears to me that there would be significant royalty owning for use of other's art/patents, even just for the "use microwave magnetron to heat water" part of the product.
- the company has provided no information sufficient to verify that there is a patent application or in what jurisdiction.
After the patent discoveries I realized why I had always found it so odd that Wanderport was being so secretive about its technology. Do you remember the PR where they explained why they had not allowed any site visits, to protect their IP in the water heater ? I thought at that time, what's it matter if its under patent protection and it is a private visit by investors ?
Exactly !!
But it is the only material change in accounts shown for the quarter other than the outbound (unspecified) $11,000 / month for consulting.
don't blame the messenger
iirc it was Belize that first started the mixup between UMC (UMI) and Meyers Pumps, when he posted company data for that last, after the UNC (UMI) data had been found indicating <5 employees and approx 500,000 annual sales.
There were two $10,000 usd private loans mentioned in the Apr-June quarterly as being the source of operating capital for the quarter.