WOW... USEI's CEO fights back at Daniel Fishers (Forbes)
This is on the first page of the USEI's page.
A retraction may be required... Mr. Fishers either intentionally or was sloppy... IMO
February 14, 2007
William Baldwin, Editor
Forbes Magazine
60 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10011
Re: Letter to the Editor of Forbes Magazine in Response to Article Entitled KissyKat and the Magic Diesel in the February 26, 2007 edition by Daniel Fisher
Dear Editor:
Daniel Fisher's article contains inaccuracies relating to U.S. Energy Initiatives Corporation and I request that these statements are corrected. I am requesting this correction be made with an equal amount of presence and exposure given the inaccuracies of the above cited article.
I am the Chief Executive Officer of U.S. Energy Initiatives Corporation. We manufacture a patent system that converts diesel engines to operate on natural gas. We have been in business since 1996 and our inventor's patents date back to the early 80s. The Forbes article incorrectly states that U.S. Energy participates in the ethanol/ biodiesel market space.
In addition, the article mistakenly groups U.S. Energy with others that have or plan to make or market either biodiesel or ethanol. In fact, certain of my shareholders have misconstrued your article to infer that our company offers a technology that "involves heating organic chemicals." A quick check of our internet web site and our Securities and Exchange Commission filings which are all current and up to date doesn't mention such a technology in any way, manner, shape or form.
What is more troubling however is the inference that we are somehow opportunistic or only interested in a sale of our stock deference to our shareholders. I was hired by Mr. Stanton as U.S. Energy's Chief Executive Officer and while it is up to others to speak to my success or lack thereof, you might like to learn that we have been on board here at U.S. ENERGY since January 2004. When we came on the scene, U.S. Energy had exactly $6.00 in the bank, two employees, no facilities, no contracts and were facing a rather extensive list of legacy issues. In short, we had a start-up enterprise with almost eight years of failed execution. Instead of just needing to get 100 yards for a touch down, our side of the field had several hundred yards to start before we got to our own 1 yard line.
Since you missed certain key facts in your careful due diligence, please let me remind you that as we enter our fourth year I can point you to our SEC filings wherein we report:
Our first act in assuming the mantle at US Energy was to get all our required securities filings current. We have maintained this current status since that time period. Prior to our involvement and principally due to lack of funds, U.S. Energy had been a delinquent filer from 2001 through 2004.
U.S. Energy's year-end revenues for 2006 will exceed the past seven years combined. While we will post a loss to earning, the revenue trends are clearly turning in our favor. We have forecast 2007 as the first profitable year in the eleven year history of US Energy;
U.S. Energy now owns and operates a 10,000 square-foot systems development facility in PeachTree City, Georgia which boasts a fully-equipped state-of-the-art engine development cell as well as a host of emission testing equipment;
U.S. Energy now operates a 10,000 square foot electronics manufacturing company that we acquired during 2006 to gain improvements in efficiency and cost related to our core product;
U.S. Energy now employs 43 individuals between Georgia and Florida. All of our employees receive full medical insurance and given our very low rate of attrition, I believe we can safely say our employees are genuinely satisfied.
Speaking more to the point of your article. Mr. Stanton has personally invested well over $2,000,000 into our enterprise starting January 2004. For those funds, Mr. Stanton has been issued exclusively restricted stock with no registration or other unusual rights. As we are preparing now to file our Form 10KSB for the year ended 2006, I can report to you that Mr. Stanton continues to hold all stock which has been issued to him for the past three going on four years.
U.S. Energy now is under contract with General Motors Corporation (GM) to facilitate their C190 Colorado pickup program for the 2007 through 2009 model years. While your article appears to infer our technology is not accepted, it's nice to see the biggest kid on the block disagrees. IN case you didn't catch it, we've been doing business with GM since June of 05 and we signed our contract in June of 06. I've been told this is rather rapid for a small company like ours.
U.S. Energy is now under contract with an off-shoot of the Thailand government to convert their bus fleet over a five year period. The value of the contact, a copy of which is of course available, is $54,000,000.
U.S. Energy recently announced a partnership with BAF Technologies to achieve a California Air Resource Board (CARB) Tier III off-road certification for our system married together with the SmartMuffler technology.
U.S. Energy is now able to accelerate our entry in China through our long-term partnership with US-based WITCO Systems.
In summary, after three years, all old legacy issues are resolved; U.S. Energy enjoys a solid, proven, patent-protected product, revenue trends pointing strongly in our favor, well equipped and staffed facilities both in Georgia and Florida, an international network of clients including the world's largest automotive OEM and a host of other opportunities to deploy our technology.
And none of our activities are in any manner associated with or involved in the ethanol or biodiesel market space.
Speaking personally, I have been operating U.S. ENERGY for three years. I continue to hold every share of stock issued to me since that date. In fact, during December we reviewed our company top to bottom. As a turn-around project, we believe that 2007 represents our best opportunity to return positive earnings to our shareholders. As a result of our review, we determined there were several roles that could be eliminated without hindering our core mission.
However, before we eliminated a single position, I cancel my compensation. Beginning with the month of January, I will continue serving full-time as the Chief Executive Officer with Sarbanes-Oxley responsibilities, but I will not be receiving compensation until we can report a positive quarter to our shareholders. My compensation is not being deferred, paid in stock or given in any respect. We are committed and dedicated to the course of our turn-around and such changes, in our view, should start at the top. Mr. Stanton concurs with this view.
We have worked very hard these past four years and at many times to our own detriment. We did not just begin our business as part of the latest hype as you infer. In fact, we briefly considered entering the biodiesel market space but opted to stick to our core frankly, for many of the reasons cited in your article. Ethanol we believe is a poor band-aid and biodiesel is simply too crowded at this stage for our small company to effectively compete.
I couldn't help but notice in your article how you made an effort to interview Mr. Stanton and it appears several other companies captured under the weight of your pen. I find it strange that you didn't offer me the same courtesy. While I am not in a position to speak for any of the other companies in the above referenced article, I can speak for U.S. Energy Initiatives.
If Mr. Stanton is only interested in that quick gain as you clearly attempt to portray, in the case of U.S. Energy, he apparently forgot to take advantage of the situation. In the experiences of U.S. Energy, experiences by the way that are all matters of public record, Mr. Stanton has made our survival possible and has not yet, after three years, taken a dime back nor has he sold any of the shares of stock. Further, our Company has no involvement in either ethanol or biodiesel.
As a long-term reader of Forbes various products, I believe its magazine and web site are thought provoking and insightful because they appear to be well researched articles and informative. In addition, when a glaring mistake or misstatement of fact is brought to Forbes attention, it has always been quick to set the record straight. I am confident they will continue this practice. I believe Forbes readers and more importantly, my shareholders, deserve a correction with at least equal prominence to the article.
Sincerely
Mark Clancy
Chief Executive Officer
U.S. Energy Initiatives Corporation
cc: D. Ocasio, Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference LLP
