First of all, you can tell just how truly Mickey Mouse this outfit is by the fact that they publish releases that look like they were written by a twelve-year old. Scratch that, a lot of twelve-year olds know how to use periods and commas. When you are claiming to be mental giants, it helps if your claims don't look like the work of semi-literate dropouts. People might draw the conclusion that you don't have even the most minimal education necessary to pull off your goals --- in this case a most accurate conclusion.
Personally, I love the attack on manufacturers spending money for spending money to change one system on one hundred year old gas engines. If there was anything that these people could write to prove their incompetence, that certainly did it. Lets look at a few points:
* Steam engines were old when gas engines were new. By their logic it should be cheaper and simpler to modify the even older, and longer established steam engine. That would be nice if they managed to get something to work half as well as engines that are 150 years old.
* Just where do they get the figure of $250 million to change a single system? These companies are letting them look at precise breakdowns of their spreadsheets? That would mean these companies are engaged in very few, very small programs … if we were to believe the storytellers at Cyclone. From this, it's obvious that they have no idea just how many projects major companies undertake … proving once again that they sold investors a bill of goods when claiming to be an R & F outfit. As an auditor, Frankie advised clients to publish exact, detailed accounts of all transactions so that competitors would know precisely what the client was up to? Yeah....right. This is obviously another bogus number pulled out of thin air by a pair of bogus "experts" in a feeble attempt to justify tossing away money on a bunch of predictions also pulled out of thin air. Diesel efficiency, water lubrication, spider bearings, parallel path steam generators with single point controls, compact condensers made out of plates having no extended heat exchange surfaces …. and so on.
* The same companies they denigrate actually own real dyno facilities, not the joke Cyclone tries to pawn off. They have large staffs of trained professionals, labs, machine shops and so on. They are not working out of a rental garage that mostly serves as a warehouse for another failed business, with a disintegrating sign over the door, and no real facilities. They can do this because they made sure they could deliver what they promised and then plowed money back into the company rather than just spending millions, like idiots, on things that they never independently verified as being mechanically or thermodynamically feasible.
* Auto companies have experts that they listen to. Cyclone gets experts, puts their name on advertising, then ignores them. After all, the experts can't know more than ingenious Harry.
* These companies actually make things. Wow, what a concept. They probably produce thousands of cars for each advertisement put out to the media, and likely a similar number on each patent taken out. By contrast, that's all Cyclone has ever produced …. advertising and patents.
In conclusion, it's amazing that the Cyclone perpetrators haven't dislocated a shoulder patting themselves on the back. Actually, they have become more modest over time...with good reason, they have so much to be modest about.
They have talked about being a purveyor of "disruptive" and "game changing" technologies. They have talked about being at the vanguard of a "billion dollar" industry. Repeatedly they were going into production "in six months". They have claimed to have solved all the problems they confronted then a few years later complained that people should be understanding because doing R & D is difficult. (It wasn't so difficult when they bragged about having completed it successfully.) NOW they claim they are superior because they don't have production oriented engineers. How did they expect to fast track into production within six months with no one onboard who knew how to do it? Could they have been lying? Of course not! They probably thought it would happen the same way they figured to make a revolutionary engine following a man who had no education or experience in the field.
Any person with a normal amount of honesty, integrity and pride would be fantastically embarrassed to have failed to deliver on so many prognostications and promises. The same person would be mortified at taking investor's money without having made legitimate,good-faith attempts at running things on a professional level. The same person would have been constitutionally unable to brag about a series of achievements that they can't actually demonstrate after a decade. The fact that this outfit is still tooting its own horn says a lot … none of it good. On the other hand, you can't say that they suffer from too much modesty!
