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.
Question??? Has anyone researched to try and find out what lab will be performing the test. After specnding some more time reviewing several different PRs, PODCAST, and reviews Max Bennett has repetively made reference to a Detroit based Powertrain Testing Lab. I researched some facilities and only found a few that could perform all the testing they are requesting. DTL Labs is the only real testing facility(among independent labs) that has an extensive history and reputation among the automotive industry.
If any one has any insight or suggestions to the testing lab I would appreciate it.
Thanks
www.watchittech.com
you will see a respective link to podcasts
WTCT Twittered New PODACST out this evening or early AM in respect to Q&A.
Hope they addressed some of my questions.
GLTA
My apology, the EPA certified lab was the Colorado Lab that did the previous tests.
I undestand your reservations are in the validity of the Detroit EPA Accredited Lab. I can respect that.
If the Lab is respected and widely accepted amongst the automotive industry as they claim then that is suffiecient enough for me. JMHO
The reason for this testing at the Detroit lab, which we do not know exactly which lab it is. Is that this labe is widely accepted within the automotive industry.
The testing is to be much more in depth to show chemical analysis, torque results, etc. These tests were derived in conjunction with the potential financier. So, in my opinion the financier would want much more in depth testing before financing the reformer.
Why is that? We discussed this issue the other day. EPA authorizes independent labs to conduct testing for the EPA 511 program. The findings of the tests can be submitted to the EPA along with application to the EPA 511 program.
So, the validity of the independent EPA accredited lab vs. an EPA lab means nothing. Even if they participated in the EPA 511 program which they still can, EPA will and would not endorse any after market retrofit device.
I really liked this PR as it states the significance between the previous testing and the testing being done in Detroit.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prwebwatchit/tech/prweb5273194.htm
Nano,
That is an honest analysis of the situation. I hope for the company and the shareholders that they would not file for a patent if they honetly felt they were infringing upon an already existing one.
We all know it happens all the time and companies make millions and settle in court for a whole lot less. I guess they feel that is acceptable.
I guess my immediate concerns are the test results and financing. We are all waiting to see that. Because if test results come back non supportive then financing will not be made available and they are back to square one.
If it comes back replicated and financing is approved then the stock ticks up appropriately until the next step.
Myself, I have a good feeling. Please do not invest on my feelings.
Nano,
Glad you sent me that link. I definitely understand that a patent in Japan exists from the DENSO Coporation in which the examiner has made a critical analysis of the claims by Rob Ryon in the light of the description in the DENSO patent and finds the two DENSO inventions claim novelty and inventive steps.
This in general still does not find that the Fuel Reformer of Rob Ryon or WTCT is unpatentable. Nor does it state in the written opinion to suggest Rob Ryons claims are unpatentable. That is all I am trying to say in regards to the ISR.
Is it patentable or unpatentable? I don't know and no one will until the USPTO releases their findings or issuance for a U.S. Patent. I do know that patents are usually easy to get and then if there is infringement it becomes a civil matter handled in law. Ask Microsoft and Apple.
Internationally, this would still need to be reviewed more thoroughly and I imagine it will be by the International Preliminary Examining Authorities to see if the ART(WTCT Fuel Reformer) submitted infringes upon an existing patent by DENSO Corp.
This is a good read and suggest everyone read it and research it for there own opinion.
Thanks, that is what I was looking for.
I am trying to get you to understand the ISR without accompanying written opinion means nothing. The ISR only shows that the listed patents are relevant and must be examined further to see if there is a significance. The written opinion is what is important to patentability. See below.
PCT/GL/ISPE/1
Page 126
Rule 43bis.1(a)
15.09 The examiner is also required to provide a written opinion on novelty, inventive step
and industrial application of the claimed invention at the same time as he establishes the
international search report. The international search report and written opinion together serve
to inform the International Preliminary Examining Authorities of the documents and
arguments necessary to complete the relevant assessments themselves if international
preliminary examination is demanded, as well as informing the designated Offices for the
purposes of their consideration of the application in the national phase (the written opinion
being transmitted to them in the form of an international preliminary report on patentability
WASHINGTON, June 14, 2011 – Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III released the department’s new operational energy strategy today.
Lynn said. It spent $15 billion on energy last year, 75 percent of which was for military operations. The department’s gasoline costs are up 225 percent from a decade ago.
Lynn said there is “a clear connection” between innovation and energy technology. The strategy addresses energy needs as a broad, military challenge and calls for reducing demand, improving efficiency and lowering costs.
Everyone is looking at going Green and Conserving. The time is now and I hope WTCTs claims and plan gets rolling.
China is the largest consumer of crude oil in the world now. It would make some sense. Overall there are many directions this product can go once the results are replicated. Hoping to hear something in the next podcast this week about a time line on the results.
The issue is you note. The ISR states nothing to the effect that Rob Ryon's search request is unpatentable. That would be in the accompanying written opinion. I'm not saying that they didn't state that I just have not seen it. Most ISRs come back with many patent listed in reargds to a keyword search of a database. That doesn't mean they are the same or the technology is the same. That will be addressed further in the written opinion which is usually classified unless made public.
I would have to see the written opinion. If you know where I could find please let me know.
I just want to see the accompaning opinion to the ISR. You all do realize that is really no such thing as a international patent. There is a Patent Cooperation Treaty, but just like all other treaties the U.S. is the only one that abides by them.
The ISR only shows that there is a patent in Korea which falls in the same category. You do a search here in the U.S. I promise you will find hundreds under the search of "Reformer" "Fuel".
I'm personally not worried about this and it has no effect on the current results forthcoming and financing.
That is what we need to be worried on. Nano, you guys always refer to these pinks as Casino's. You guys must not be any better at the tables than pickin stocks. I always seem to do good at the tables.
I will give you some advice. Stay away from the slots.
Gunballs, I hope for all that the company succeeds in its endeavors and claims. You will here a lot of information discussed on this board in regards to people suggesting this company is great or a P.O.S.
I like it and I am open to discussing and researching all relevant questions. I always tell people to do their own DD and be informed. Never take others posted information as gold. I even make mistakes in my research. That is why I like discussing it on these boards.
With the low volume over the past week or so, I believe a lot of people are doing the same thing you are. Holding pending results.
Good luck.
The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an international patent law treaty, concluded in 1970.
Below is the ISR(international Search Report)you referred to. Can you please show me the written opinion in which is to accompany the ISR. The ISR merely shows a keyword searched database. This means exactly nothing.
The written opinion is initially confidential, but unless it is superseded by an International Preliminary Examination Report. I am not saying the korean opinion isnt available I just would like to see it for analysis.
Thanks,
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wads.jsp?IA=US2009052661&LANGUAGE=EN&ID=id00000010363234&VOL=97&DOC=06adb2&WO=10/017175&WEEK=NA&TYPE=NA&DOC_TYPE=ISR&TOK=JETIbOHYVpGMcWF4LBfxeN0cLGI&PAGE=1
You are correct in stating that in
Company Information and Disclosure Statement Section One: Issuers’ Quarterly Disclosure Obligations For the Quarter Ending March 31, 2011 that the Company became liable to an unsecured note payable due Robert Ryon for $508,108.69 as part of the agreement to acquire assets of Air Pure Systems Development, Inc.
The only question I have is if it is convertible. As all other notes reference conversion rate and time. This note does not. So, to accurately say that Rob Ryon is converting is subjectional. I will guess I'll need to address the company on that issue.
I like discussing this with you. You definitely bring good questions to light.
Pita,
Its not clever trading it is reacting to the market for what it is. You have to see the ups and downs and react appropriately to reduce your risk while gaining a better position. There is not one person on this board that has a position to manipulate this stock other than MMs. They are the only ones with a big enough position to have any impact.
I would respectively tell all shareholders to treat the stock for what it is and react to the market to gain a better position. It is the smart way for smaller investors such as myself.
I don't daytrade and I only hold 6 OTC stocks as I know the risk. I don't make a living off other investors but I am here to make money long term. All my investments are in green tech and oil exploration.
I guess I didn't expect Rob Ryon to give WTCT all rights to the Reformer for free. I'm still trying to figure out the complete financial transaction of the acquisition of Aire Pure. I know they released Rob Ryon recieved 800,000 Series D convertible preferred shares which could be converted to 200,000,000 common. I think I know why Rob Ryon requested the convertible preferred shares and I don't believe he is converting any of those. The convertible note and amount is still out.
Pita,
You were being so nice earlier and then you revert back to these claims. I'll be honest and say I have not made one dollar off of WTCT yet! I do have 2.1 million free shares that will continue to stay invested into WTCT stock and I hope to acquire more. So, I guess that exempts me from the worst. I don't love WTCT and I'll be the first to say that falling in love with a company is breaking rule #1. Treat the stock for what it is. Gain a position of less risk whenever possible.
I do like WTCTs approach and hope they can follow through on their claims. Successful companies in the pinks are far and few between. You don't have to look far to find companies that exploit shareholders to all the risk while corporate excepts none, but it's not every company. WTCT? well, that is for each shareholder to make that decision.
Nano, Are you suggesting that DENSO has a patent on a fuel reformer already and this makes WTCTs worthless?
DoD Strategy DoD (Dept of Defense is currently briefing congress on the New Operational Energy Strategy as I post this. You can even tune in at www.federalnewsradio.com if you wish. This Strategy is something that will be applied to all Dept of Defense (Army, Navy, Air Force). It talks about current energy needs of the force and the need to identify future needs and reduction through conservation and technology. Much of it is focused on green technology.
This is an exerpt from the Navy Energy Strategy 2010 through 2020 which is part of the DoD Energy Strategy.
"The Navy Energy Strategy
will guide a strong portfolio of investments in people,
technology, and programs across Navy enterprises.
In the near-term, the Navy will make significant
gains by adjusting policies to enable more energy
efficient operations, encouraging awareness and
energy-conscious behavior in every Navy setting,
optimizing existing technologies to reduce energy
consumption, and speeding the implementation of
new technologies, all with the intent of enhancing or
enabling greater combat readiness." (pg 5) http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil/files/2010/10/Navy-Energy-Vision-Oct-2010.pdf
For me Green Technology is the future. Ultimately the removal of carbon fuels all together is ideal, but that is many years off and DoD recognizes that and is willing to take immediate measures to reduce cost and emissions.
There is a huge market for all green technology.
One of the keys things I like about this company and new management is the transparency they have portrayed. They have not attempted to hide the debt conversion or not reply to questions concerning such.
You will definitely not find this often in the pink sheets.
As always my opinion.
I enjoy reading your posts and suggest everyone should read them as these are possibilities as to what the company can do.
I hope this is not the path the company chooses and wish the best for all.
Pita,
Are you stating that the company is diluting or is that just your opinion. We know that there is convertible shares that are entering the market and the company has been forward about it.
This is how companies operate in early stages of development. Now, after the company recieves financing and revenue and no debt reduction begins to take place and convertible shares continue to enter the market I might have an issue and believe the company is purposely diluting.
The non-restricted is still extremely low to me. Maybe it is to much of a risk for you and others. Myself, I look at other pinks for comparison and reporting and find that WTCT is a better choice for me.
Please note that I always refer to myself and ask for all to take due diligence to all board postings including mine.
I don't know anymore than anyone else. I did propose the question and hope to hear something maybe in the next podcast as to a timeline. My opinion is that testing should not take to much longer. My understanding is that the company was having the chicago company assemble or manufacture the 3 reformers. I once thought they would all be different but after reviewing previous PRs and interviews given by Max B is they are all the same. They are looking at the replication of results in manufacturing.
They want to check that the production process will yield the same results. So I am quite interested in seeing the results.
Understand that this is my own opinion I derived from my own DD and would suggest you do the same.
Me and others will be glad to see the validation. Those results in my opinion are the key to the next step for this company. Once the test results are in and the company receives financing like they stated, I would however like to see what it consists of as Pita stated. It is important to be a little more detailed and not so generalized. Hopefully Max B. will give us a little more transparency into that area.
Good luck to All!
Pita, you can't honestly deny the businesss concept is BS. You can suggest the product is BS and won't support the plan and I could respect your view point. The concept is great and the approach is perfect timing. Is it just PR fluff? Well, the jury is still out on that.
I never suggest anyone purchase shares or sell on the information discussed on this board. Please do your own DD and make your own decision.
I like WTCT, but it may not be for everyone. I wish you all the luck on this stock or any other you choose. We all respect each others decisions. Don't we Pita?
PODCAST was OK just went a little further in to detail then the PR. Talked about reoccurring revenue that would be generated once operational.
No big news, but didn't expect it. Hopefully the next podcast this week will answer some more detailed info on testing. That is the key to creating some value to the shareholder.
GLTA
PODCAST IS UP!
Sorry to hear that. Best is yet to come. Shorters will do good soon. Once results are posted we should see some good gains.
Longs (9-18 months) will hopefully do better.
Best of luck on your next picks.
Regardless of your position if you play your cards right WTCT should make you money or gain you free shares. If not, your not playing the game right.
They also posted on twitter that another podcast will be again this week regarding direction questions from shareholders.
I know I have sent emails and posted questions on twitter. I suggest you all do to regarding questions and concerns.
Don't know if its up yet but received an email podcast will be out today.
GL
Come on Pita, we can go round and round and always find things we would like have more detail on. For now I am only concerned with replication and financing. I agree once a financing agreement is made we should receive details on the contents and the financier.
But the validity of the financier is grasping at straws.
I do believe the 511 program is important and has great value for the company to acquire. As far as financing which is gravely important to the company and shareholder it is not needed as tests have been negotiated.
I suspect that the Chicago based manufacturer may be of some assistance here. They are a great asset as they are already knowledgeable in this area. That is completely my opinion.
Pita, Sorry trying to reply from my phone. The 511 testing requires the test to be performed on two separate vehicles engines. From what I can derive from the PR's is that there is three fuel reformers being tested and no reference to multiple engines. I believe the testing is to look at the differences between the three different manufacture models.
So the answer to your question is that the test are probably not the same as the 511 protocol. What I was saying is that according to earlier PR's it is irrelevant because testing procedure were negotiated with whoever is going to finance everything once the results are replicated.
Sorry for the confusion.