InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 31
Posts 5521
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/25/2010

Re: PLAYER ONE post# 90309

Monday, 04/15/2013 10:22:08 PM

Monday, April 15, 2013 10:22:08 PM

Post# of 97615
Has everything to do with all the "supportive-DD" that gets posted here about GTGP/MBS >>> Who cares why it took Acorn 1.5 years to do whatever - there a real company - with real revenues - GTGP isn't.

How's it going with GTGP and the MBS license?
When was the last time MBS received a contract for anything - operating under any ticker??

Guess it took coalogix and acorn over a year and a half after they paid 2.5 million for the license. BTW it the purchase was predicated on prior testing by the EERC. That is the pre eminent test bed for power plants.Some may want to check on that entity.How is that for some deeper DD? Many reasons to take impairment as well if you don't use it. You need a "specialist" to attest to something other than non use.I really don't think you have any actual report of the testing by Battelle or what they actually did other than make a statement only.Talk about lack of proof without the underlying data from some.


Do you have the actual "Agreement" between Coalogix and SLUP? Sounds like there was an impairment within the agreement. How did the parties resolve this matter? Is it possible that SLUP didn't want the report published at all?

CoaLogix licensed the MetalliFix technology from Solucorp pursuant to that certain Strategic Alliance and License Agreement dated as of May 9, 2008 (the “Agreement”). CoaLogix is evaluating its position under the Agreement given the impairment, and intends to engage in discussions as soon as reasonably practicable with Solucorp regarding CoaLogix’ rights and Solucorp’s obligations under the Agreement.



Why is there NO demand for MBS? Nothing....