It's not exactly a conspiracy theory to post an official US Patent Office review of the technology. If you take a step back and have an open mind and try to balance the likelihood of truth, you'll see that my analysis isn't so far off base. I don't ask people to change their positions one way or the other, I talk to a few longs in this stock via email and I think our conversations are constructive even if we don't always agree on everything. All I ask is that you have an open mind.
On one hand you have Nelson claiming the cell is going to revolutionize the economics of the energy market, on the other you have the patent reviewer rejecting their invention on a fundamental basis. The patent reviewer has no incentive to trash the invention, while there is obviously a huge incentive for Nelson to exaggerate and mislead investors, since the company relied on selling new shares of stock to fund his salary (which was a much larger expense than R&D).
There are a few basic aspects to patent proposals. First, you have to be able to describe it is what you actually invented, it's the most basic common sense thing right? If you invent something, you should be able to say: "This is what we invented!". They actually didn't do this which was one of the several reasons it was rejected.
You are also supposed to be able to describe how to build the item so that someone skilled in the art would be able to construct it for themselves, they didn't do that either.
And finally, and this is important, almost every single claim was rejected as being derivative of a German patent application from the 1990's. The fact that almost every claim from this patent application was seen by the examiner as derivative of a single other patent application is highly suspicious for obvious reasons. Again, this is not a conspiracy, simply what the examiner said, unless you think the examiner is in on the conspiracy?
The point is that it wasn't just rejected, but that there were so many flaws in the cell itself as revealed by the examination of it. There is almost no conceivable way this could ever be built (which goes a long way towards explaining why it hasn't been built) since they seem unable to describe how to build it themselves.
The fact that this idea has been around for 20+ years and hasn't been used in that time should almost speak for itself.
To be honest it really isn't that hard to figure out that this whole thing has been a ruse, but it's very hard to get people to believe they have been misled after the fact. Many people don't want to admit it because it could be seen as an admission of a personal weakness / flaw (gullibility, naivety, etc). I view people who believed Nelson as victims of a skilled marketer. Nelson is good at what he does, don't forget he has a marketing background. He can be very convincing and make you believe he is telling the truth. I saw a post here of someone saying their own family members warned him that the people behind this company were crooks, and yet he still invested. That speaks a lot to the persuasive power that Nelson has at a person to person level. Large institutions with more resources to conduct rigorous due diligence can find all the stuff I am showing you easily, which is why they have largely avoided, and will continue to avoid, this stock.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
