Pegs At least crtg should have the "Model" of the CHS product, which would be qualified to obtain a Patent App'? What I am thinking at this moment is that they don't want Investors to know how far back they are in the way of devising the new CHS+?
They surely would loudly declare "PATENT APP'" if they had a viable CHS+ product! My hope is that the Research & Development CO' or the U. of Michigan involvement would be announced to the Investors, but cannot simply because the Public and we Idiots would know that the product development is still in its infancy, or hasn't started yet? They certainly talked a lot about the new CHS+ product and how it was in their hands and securely one of their products when the NDSU agreement fell through, and that was over 2 years ago, they would have it boldly written on the very FRONT of their HOME PAGE, and have a LINEUP of interested Co's pounding at their doors as well?
If they had a workable Formula then, they should be farther along now? Also, that silence for 2+ years could mean that they are being fraught with failures, and a Patent is not that easy to procure! Just because Krafty said that they "Own" a new CHS+ product, doesn't mean that the statement is true? If they really are successful with a new CHS product, and other factors are the basis for its delay, then I would be all for KRAFT and would invest again! Truthfulness is a vital component in this Co's Business manner, and so far that is questionable!
I look forward to that April 1st. conference call, for they will come up with something in the way of verification, maybe an old but non-essential document, or maybe a new one that confirms something! But after 2+ years, we all should have some definite documents that show that they are knocking at the door of Commercialization? But they have to provide names, for if they cannot, it might mean that no one will Partner with them with what they have on Hand, (Not enough,) for it suggests that no product is yet developed enough to warrant their time and Money? GL
