At this point ,installing panic,fear and doubt seems to be more of a company objective. Candid,Clear,Open,Honest. Words that seem to be used very sparingly through PRs. Without a time frame for certification, it doesn't matter if they had a rock solid contract for 15000 units. It's just paperwork. Late last year,maybe December, "we have a PO for so may cells to be deliver by the end of June." later it was mentioned not to worry about the deadline because the PO was not a contract but more of an agreement to buy. Daaaaa
We now get a PR for a wapping 500 cells. It's great news but with no time frame for the certification required to produce these things it becomes an non event. What a difference if Monday they came out and said that the cell is certified and production will commence. To day they come out and say they have a PO for 500 cells. Now that is a PR and in the proper order investors can see money on the next report and growth.
Isn't that what sells stock and drives up pps? Income and growth, what a great pair. My take is that a lot of people were expecting not only an earlier release but one with a lot more bite.
Bottom line is that they don't have a production line if they don't have a producton model. Isn't something someone can produce key to the process? They have to have that to even sell to customers outside of the country. Isn't it amaseing how important " production model" can be ?
Someone has stated that they are waiting on a part to be cast. It is suppose to make the unit maybe less expensive to make or something like that. They have to have a supply of those parts to sell to anyone anywhere.
Production model is key , they have to have a production line to produce the production model. See how that follows. Once completed they would have the option to start selling overseas while the unit and line are being certified. Might I say that the last part would only take a matter of weeks to finish. Bashers are of course not welcome on any board but equal time for different opinions should be very welcome even if not agreed on by a few of the members.
I have a record of trying to be as open minded as possible. At what point does one suggest that the company needs to step up to the plate an answer the hard questions. Ambiguous should not be tollerated by the stock holders. Remember that litigation is "suppose to be" over. Should it matter any more. That crutch is worn out.
AI
