QS Energy Inc (QSEP)

[PumpersExposed]

To quote from the TERMINATION that is held up as a positive:

Data generated by, and results of the testing, have not yet been determined (See Note 8)."

So, if TCPL was so impressed that they wanted to end this agreement sooner (when they don't have to to do anything else purchase or lease of more AOT's), to be able to purchase more AOT's (when they don't have to end this lease to do so), or lease more units (when they don't have to end this lease to do so), then why/how could they determine if that was a good buy when the results have not even been determined to see if it is worthwhile, or a purchase/lease that would make sense?

WHAT company on the planet would move forward quicker, when they had not determined the results of testing?

A FAR more plausible explanation is it did SO LITTLE so obviously right away, that they didn't need to run the full lease/testing period to get more information on something they already know. However, due to the TERMS OF THE LEASE, they need to leave it on for STWA to be able to continue their testing for the 90 days.

The testing step flowchart in a nutshell would be:

1) See if it even works in a safe bypass area

- YES WORKS - Go to step #2
- NO DOES NOT WORK - go to step #6

2) See if it affects the integrity system on the pipeline.

- YES WORKS - Go to step #3
- NO DOES NOT WORK - go to step #5

3) Move to another location (thus the $20,000 clause) to test in a higher flow location (more real-world use), for wear and maintenance.

- YES WORKS - Go to step #4
- NO DOES NOT have a benefit over wear/maint costs - go to step #6

4) Purchase and/or lease more AOT's

5) Change testing to see if detrimental effects could be fixed/mitigated.

- YES WORKS - Go to step #3
- NO DOES NOT WORK - go to step #6

6) TERMINATE lease.


So in this simplistic example, TCPL went to step #1, then right to step #6. FACT.

The termination of a lease to speed things up & continue to pay the $ 60,000 IMO states they are still
looking at the data from the AOT .

What company on the planet would terminate a lease to move forward with a purchase or further leases while still assessing data? And again, they have to pay the 60 grand for the 90 days they have given.

It does not state that TC is not going to negotiate a new purchase or lease

They could have without terminating.. This lease only applies to that ONE AOT. In fact if they were still going over data, but loved what they saw in 2 weeks, it would make FAR more sense to keep this lease going to continue the testing, while negotiating a framework for the future leases/purchases on a separate contract.

--------------------------------

Nearly one month away from D Day. What are we expecting when termination date for TC pilot program finishes.

1. Nothing from STWA mgmt. I wouldn't be suprised

2. Announcement of contract prior or just past this date ?

3. Continuation of testing and pilot program. I think very unlikely.

1) You bet nothing will come out.
2) TCPL could have now.. either by leasing more, or buying more since the present lease only applies to that ONE AOT they have leased. Instead, TCPL cancelled the lease. There is no reason for them to do so if they wished to do ANYTHING outside of this present, soon to expire, lease.
3) Not sure if cancelling a lease has other interpretations.

Really leaves us with one scenario doesn't it.

It actually still leaves #1 and #3 and very unlikely the lease will continue (#3) since it has been terminated, as possibilities. Also missing is #4, TCPL sends the AOT packing back home.

I have ZERO concerns regarding LG Partners.

Or J. Berns, RMOTC claims when the RMOTC station had not even been built out for testing.. no baseline set in testing, TWST interview of profitability Kyte PAID for, claims on the Elektra, zefs, and all other products, claims of contracts, distributors, sales, manufacturing, paid promotion..etc..etc. However, some might want o know about the past false claims and misleading NR's.

-----------------

Second laugh o' the day:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/23/idUS107528+23-Nov-2010+MW20101123
Tue Nov 23, 2010

Advanced Diesel Technology "ADT" is the joint fuel savings project from
STWA and Verdantec for the development of products to increase efficiency
for commercial diesel trucks. Under the joint alliance, STWA's technology
will be incorporated into Verdantec's pre-packaged fuel efficiency
solutions for diesel fleets. The suite will consist of STWA's ELEKTRA(TM)
unit, one of Verdantec's environmentally-oriented fuel conditioners and
Verdantec's automated delivery systems. According to a Verdantec
principal, Verdantec expects the "ADT" project to generate a 15% fuel
savings and a 25-30% reduction in diesel fuel emissions, supported by EPA
certification.

According to a Verdantec principal? lol! Lucky this mystery man only "expects" it to do that and gain EPA certification... those master wordsmiths!

This agreement marks an important, yet quiet milestone that has been in
play for the past six months," said Cecil Bond Kyte, Chairman and CEO of
STWA, Inc. "Our relationship with Verdantec has reduced the fixed asset
carrying costs of our R&D facility by 60% and has helped Verdantec by
limiting its upfront cap-ex requirements. Additionally, this alliance can
open potential immediate and long-term revenue streams in Q1 and Q2 2011
as we pursue our go to market plans."

Wow! Profits!!!!!!!!!!!!! No R&D anymore!

Wait a minute.. "potential".. ahhh.. I see what happened there.. sorry.

I would assume if the QR's were checked, carrying costs did not change.

Funny thing is, on corporate wiki it says:

Verdantec, Inc. filed as an Articles of Incorporation in the State of California and is no longer active. This corporate entity was filed approximately four years ago on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 as recorded in documents filed with California Secretary of State.

Which seems to imply it didn't even form until a month after the NR.. I wonder how then this company had all these great benefits Cecil waxed poetically about? Oh wel... at least it might have actually been active around that time.. unlike the J Berns NR to which they mentioned a company the Elektra was going to, that wasn't in existence or active.