Replies to post #2002 on Value Microcaps Zip Code Changers

[10 bagger]

JBII.. Cross post Zapped in record time.. But It's here.. hank

[zenvesting]

JBI: I'm cross posting my own post, because it contains actual chemistry information....and is sure to be deleted from the JBII board any second:

Manipulation of information and persuasive speaking do not constitie a good technical discussion.

As for JBs responses to my e-mail, it's all circuitous manipulative associations and BS....not one straight answer....and I feel it hardly warrants a serious response....but here you are posting it like it's worth a grain of salt. I've done my best to try to keep it serious....but couldn't handle JB's BS....and got a bit sarcastic towards the end. I added my comments below.

Here, follow this link and open the second search result and read the first 20 pages. Are you really sure JBI's "secret" catalyst doesn't infringe on the huge base of knowledge already out there? If you actually read this, you'll probably learn more than JB seams to know about P2O chemistry....and might begin to wonder why his answers below are completely void of any technical terminology what so ever:
http://www.google.com/search?q=catalytic+pyrolysis&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GWYA_en

My comments are denoted below with "-->".


>>Regarding JBII, first an foremost, look into the existing companies technologies....and Google "catalytic pyrolysys" and "patents"....there's a lot of patents issued and pending in this process....many academics, industries, and universities working in this area for decades.....and there's no way to even begin to research if JBII's "seceret" catatalyst infringes on the current base of claimed IP. How does one even begin to research intellectual property rights with the minimal information JBII has made available?



We are not going to release the composition of the catalyst, the same as Pepsi is not going to release information about their secret formula to appease investors.


--> Actaully, Pepsi does disclose the ingredients of their soft drink, it's required by the FDA...read the label jack. The issue I'm concerned with is does their unpatented process infringe on someone elses patented process....and none of this answer above or below addresses that issue.

As for Universities working on this.... I've had assistance from institutions with respect to this. I've talked to one prof at length who was involved in catalyst development for the Oil and Gas industry. He has advised they have done away with a lot of R&D in the catalyst field because the refineries are quite efficient now. They keep R&D costs down for a good bottom line.

I work with a large Oil and Gas company now (8+ billion) and I know their R&D cycles and it usually pertains to new exploration and only when crude prices are high. As I communicate well with scientists, I have had many discussions with their geophysicists and scientists about how they work. It helps us process and migrate their data.


--> tech, this is an obvious diversion from the issue I'm asking about....and dropping names and trying to sound like he's go impressive qualifications. Seriously, go google for yourself, there's hundreds of patents on catalysts for catalytic pyrolysis.....and he's talking about geophysics? I've actually used a Ground Penetrating Radar, Electrical Imaging, and several other surface geophysical devices....but that's a completely unrelated subject....so who give a damn?

Look at Firefly Battery. The physicist who developed their hybrid battery had never worked in battery research before. He was not bound by assumptions of scientists immersed in that field.


--> Science is based on laws and theories....there's a certain set of laws and theories that dictates what's physically and chemically possible...Firefly has simply increased the surface area for ion exchange in batteries....good idea....and within the realm of scientific reality....good for them....what's this got to dow with P2O again?

>>That's not to mention that Bordynuik has no experieince in the petrochemical industry that I know of.


I don't need to be. That why I have two chemists Alan Barnett, Ron Kurp, and islechem. We have 5 total and they do know what they are talking abut. I can however take information in unrelated fields and apply it. I purchased the blest unit, modified it and tried a catalyst composition. Alan then purchased a GC, then Intertek tested the fuel and then we purchased a large processor, tested the process at 300kg, then islechem. It works scaled. If you are sceptical then don't invest until we see financial data.

I do learn _really_ quickly.


--> Good for you you narcisitic liar, then write like you've finished a high school chemistry class...or have any idea what the hell you're talking about....let's start talking about ion exchange rates....energy required to break cross-linked polymers....or anything relevant to the P2O subject instead of your vague BS.

>>Regardless of any one's IQ, if you don't have experience working in a regulated industry, you'll tend to overlook and oversimplify the regulatory requirements and the direct and indirect costs of compliance with those industries >>regulations.


You don't need a high IQ to hire process engineers and technicians to solve those problems. Our key person has already designed and built a fully operational permitted magnesium recycling plant. He is not a chemist but knows permits and processes -- and understands volatiles.


--> Volatiles?? How about oleofins? (tech, have you done your recommended reading?)



>> Regardless of any one's IQ, if you don't have experience working in a regulated industry, you'll tend to overlook and oversimplify the regulatory requirements and the direct and indirect costs of compliance with those >>industries regulations. For instance, there's boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) regulations that are coming into effect later this year.....those will likely affect the gas burning "heater" unit for JBII's >>process....and I imagine they will require some emissions controls.....that I'm most certain that JB didn't account for when he threw out that $10/barrell number out there.


Yes we did. In fact $10/barrel was a very conservative amount. It is much less.

--> What a joke Johny....show me some fact and figures.


IQ has nothing to do with it. Bringing in the right people to test, refine, and build a successful process is what is key. I have a gift to apply knowledge and solutions in one area to a completely different field. It paid off again with P2O.


---> "I have a gift..." What a narcissistic jack ass!


> Honestly, I'm intellectually offended with the way he throws that number around with no good explanation of the factors involved....does it include employee retention costs, maintenance, property, feedstock handling >equipment, etc., etc.? Frankly, I don't think he can honestly claim to have a clue of the production costs without any operations history to refer to....that number is completely based on assumptions....and I've never even >seen a basic explanation of what those are.


It clear this individual has done no DD on our management team. I don't throw numbers out lightly. Our management team has completed many $100M+ private deals that do involve complex costs and they make them profitable. Geoff Weber loaded up the JV business model with every cost imaginable including: royalties, maintenance, labour, permitting (URS), operator, spares, and then after determining those costs (really loaded up), he cut production in half.

I'm surprised this individual hasn't done 10 minutes of DD. Start with islechem and work back if needed.

--> LOL, you're management tean that doesn't include one Chemical Engineer? This company is an absolute joke.....he doesn't know an oleofin from a parafin....and I can't believe I'm wasting my time replying to this BS....I should be writing a complaint to the SEC instead.

P.S. islechem engineers formed islechem by privatizing Occidental Chemical's R&D lab. Their passion is unique: They are concerned that their own kids can't get jobs on Grand Island (or in Niagara for that matter). They've run their tests and allowed us to put their name in a PR as they are happy with the results so far. and don't think for one moment they didn't weren't sceptical at first.


--> Wow, they allowed you to use their name in a PR....and the PR said nothing about their opinion of your process....whipdie do.



Lastly, I am not going to release details that would help bring in competitors. It's difficult enough to do business as a public company and I certainly won't make it harder for us. As always, invest if/when you feel comfortable.


--> ROFLMAO!!!

[rocketeer357]

I'll bite on the JBII question. I was lucky enough to buy this almost a year ago when the shell was being purchased. At a cost basis of .45 a share, there's no way I can leave this party til I know the outcome. However, at today's PPS, I don't know...

With JBII, don't let the IHUB board throw you. The evangelical fervor over there has become the story, and that's unfortunate because the real story is the viability of P2O.

What's known is this: the CEO says there will be a working, large-scale P2O machine on display at the shareholder meeting in April....so the wait won't be too long.

Perhaps because this is all that is actually known in regard to P2O, the IHUB board has become a cacophony of other voices, speculations, attacks and serious pumps.

I bought because the shell play made sense. I'm holding because I like the CEO. He is a very, very bright guy. He's certainly green as a CEO, but if he has the goods that he claims, it won't matter because what he claims is only slightly short of modern day alchemy! GLTY