InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 3
Posts 81
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/21/2011

Re: snow post# 166049

Friday, 02/17/2012 3:10:28 PM

Friday, February 17, 2012 3:10:28 PM

Post# of 312016
Snow, I don't think we have verification of either. That is why I've asked.

IMO, it is reasonable to have some routine down time in everyone's financial estimates, but we don't know how much. There certainly seem to have been interruptions in the past to keep #1 from running 24/7. Likewise, we know 2-6 were announced as an objective(and everyone seems to think we have now seen a really nice picture of a completed #2 and I agree) but we really don't know status of completion on any of it. I share the assumption that this CC will disclose at least news about #2 and hopefully #3. It also might be possible that the logistics of getting twice the rate of plastic in the processors may have caused #3 to go into the new building, although that was announced to be a fabrication facility. Personally, I hope they don't try and do all fabrication in-house due to the delays that could cause. Even if they had to pay 50% more per unit to have them built elsewhere, in light of the revenue per processor, I think the delay would be far more costly than the increase in expense. All of that, though is just speculation and opinion. I am just a shareholder with questions like everyone else.