To investors:
In my opinion, John, unfortunately, in his zeal to get this thing up and running, had gotten way ahead of himself with timeframes that were unattainable. Obviously, that has led to a lot of grumbling/pain among shareholders. I understand that. I am a shareholder. But, he knows what he has and had it verified by others (Summit Environmental, AmSpec).
I think anyone else who felt they had created a revolutionary product might have made the same rush to the "pulpit" especially if that same product has the potential of:
1) reducing America's dependence on foreign oil
2) helping out American farmers
3) helping out America's environmental challenges.
John tacked on other humanitarian causes that some criticize (but shouldn't), but those three listed above were specific to John's biofuel product itself.
It led him to seek out associations that he press released too soon trying to get good news to investors before finding out that they were not what they purported to be.
1) The merger with United Ethanol. This was a strategy to
shortcut USSE to get to the OTC Bulletin Board. I was
never in favor of this and was delighted this deal
fell apart, especially given that John learned things
weren't up to snuff.
2) In the case of Illinois Biofuels, a company that still isn't
producing anything and wouldn't have been my first choice
as a strategic partner, John was asked to pony up $1.2
million bucks for a property that appraised for $ 200K.
When he found that out, he sidestepped a landmine and
moved on.
3) It has been reported that Stanton also reneged on providing
financing that was promised in return for shares of the
company. While the shares were provided, the funding
wasn't. John is taking action to recoup those same
shares. Will that be a slam dunk? Who knows? But,
wouldn't you want the CEO to retrieve compensation to a
third party if there was a breach of contract to the
company?
4) In the case of BCEI, they failed to pony up the funding
that was promised. John gave them more time and they
still didn't pony up. And that's when John moved on. He
accepted what he thought was a reasonable delay and when
BCEI reneged, he walked away and looked for another avenue.
Anyone can make their case that this isn't the best way to do business, but as CEO, you do what you do to move forward and protect/advance your company. I think that's what John did in all of the above four instances.
Change in strategy was another thing. The original strategy was to use USSEC's biofuel straight up to generate electric power as the fastest way to market. I don't think John anticipated the foot-dragging that municipalities would do. Or understood the capital requirements for getting into that business. I certainly didn't.
Use of the fuel as straight biofuel in the fuels and engines market, even as the WSR report included, was going to be an even longer path. We haven't even talked about how eventually the straight biofuel should eclipse all this blended product, but for now, as a strategy to get product to market, John shifted focus to that. While communications to investors suffered during this whole strategy shift, in my opinion, given recent updates, this strategy has the best chance for near term success.
No one is saying that all these things with the lack of communication to shareholders from the company hasn't hurt credibility and it is why the pps stands where it is. But it doesn't mean John is dishonest. Mostly it means shareholders feel misled given the original expectation that revenues from power generation would be already be on the books and the failure of some business deals to get successfully off the ground.
But, if John is now really tying up the trade secret to USSE (as some here are reporting/rumoring), it might be that while trying to protect it (isolating his baby from those who would try to defeat it by raising capital through share sales alone), it may have had a dampening effect on companies who will not provide additional needed funding for expansion unless that trade secret becomes part of USSE's asset base. Maybe John has come to that conclusion on his own. That's just a guess on my part.
I posted here earlier that even though I was aware John himself owned the trade secret, I took the risk in investing in the company's stock anyway(and added to my positions since my original investment in Nov 2006). You bet that's a risk, but it was one I was and still am willing to take.
If it doesn't work out, well, all my eggs weren't in one basket. But, I think it will work out. The timeframes might be much longer than we originally were told and while that's unfortunate, this product is much too important, even if it's an opening salvo, as an additive to ignore.
I'm certain parts of this will be copied and challenged six ways from Sunday within the next 10 minutes.
But, this is my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
