Replies to post #490 on Platinum Research Organization, Inc.(fka PLROQ)

[Patrick111]

I have some simple questions:
Where is the demand?
Where is the product?
Where is the manufacturing facility, factory or even the plan for any of it?
Where is the Distribution agreement?
Where is the marleting plan?

For the record I am a real investor and have money in several companies. Quite frankly I have suspicion about shaw, Oreo, Ermilo ONE SINGLE INVESTMENT and such detailed DEFENSE of what is definetely a very BAD INVESTMENT.

All I see is 500,000.000 million shares being created and distributed as compensation and some nice salaries along with huge piles of shares being distributed and a whole bunch of shares being diluted.

In the end any product must abide by the consumer. People could not care less about the specifics. They will buy what MOBIL, Chevron and Siemens put out in the market. Quite honestly if they do not have plans to even come up with something until 2009 this company is a bad investment.

do you know what Charlen Dickens said a GOLD MINE was?
A hole in the groun with a liar on top screaming GOLD, GOLD, at least there is always the hope if you dig deeper you will find some metal. This is no GOLD MINE, and I have a huge LOSS to prove it. WORST INVESTMENT EVER IN MY LIFE PERIOD.

[Patrick111]

I trully appreciate those links it was fun reading.

Let me first say that the patents of PLRO do not make them a BASE OIL company, and as far as I know the plan is not to become a oil producer, refiner or a laboratory. As I understand it they want to market and produce grease and oil additives. Big difference.

I may also point out that the new oil standards that apparently will take place in July 2009 with the new oils such as GF-4, GF-5, PC-10 (API CJ-4) etc have caused a massive investment of billions of dollars from the big consortiums of Exxon/Mobil; Chevron/Texaco; Conoco/ Philips; Pennzoil and Quakers among others. Those companies have submitted OILS to be tested and which will gain aproval in 2008.

Each of those tests can be very expensive and they pay anywhere between $75,000 per test (depending on the class of oils) all the way to $533,000 per test of PC-10 oils. Once the product has been tested and after such expense I doubt they will be willing to negotiate putting an additive no matter what claims to contain. I may also add that most of those tested products will have a reccomendation that NO ADDITIVES SHOULD BE USED.

As a matter of fact the API Base Oil Interchange Task Force is chaired by CHEVRON John Rosenbaum.

Exxon Mobil have already introduced Mixed ofefin PAO claiming they can provide enhanced performance. Companies such as Chevron have already products that are lining up the products to come one the new OIL STANDARD applies JULY 9 2009.

At the same time Billions are being invested by these companies in new GTL (Gas to Liquid) products in which they intend to convert gas into liquid fuels which will have negligible sulfur contents. Also the increased demand in Europe and Asia for Diesel fuel will continue to put pressure on base fuel oil and those companies trying to grab the market of oil additives for gasoline vehicles.

It is also important that people know that a lot of the additives of oils are in fact made from "impurities" removed from base oils in the refining process by the major refineries. So a lot of companies produce oils and additives as a by product and so it is not a refining factor. Only 1 to 1.5 percent of refining output is base oils and additives so it is not an important factor for refineries. However as far as production how successful can this company be competing against that.

Other companies with products and with strong connections as they have developed their products in consortiums in Asia, Europe, Canada and the USA are companies such as Afton, MOtive, Savant, Lubrizol, Southwest, Chevron.

Again where is the uniqueness of the company and who says they have no competition.