Replies to post #5674 on Beacon Power Corp. (fka BCONQ)

[MasterBlastr]

Looks like equity has already fallen below zero here.

[the cork]

I think it sucks. The DOE essentially forced the issue. They saw a chance to get our plant and they took it.

Still, I don't think it's as bleak as all that. They let us have our 3 million bucks back LoL!

The Stephentown facility will remain a significant component of the revenue stream. They are gonna sell the plant not the technology.

Beacon will likely remain the operator and provide service contracts for the life of the project. Same with any other project down the road.

They can't just go to the yellow pages and get a replacement, so it seems like Beacon should have a guaranteed ongoing business relationship.

The Stephentown facility remains a working demonstration prototype for future sales regardless of who "owns" it.

It was a prime ripe plumb perfect for plucking, and thanks to the DOE, we just got plucked.

[RoboTrader]

Of course Beacon gets a percentage of the sale. The plant actually cost over $70M to build and they used $39M of the DOE loan to build it.

\\//_

[RoboTrader]

Think of the NY plant as a "start up" technological test. The revenue that would have been collected from NY is nothing compared to the facility that will be built in Hazel, PA. Beacon is in a unique position with a unique employed staff. That PA project is a much bigger project and the DOE has already just recently given a grant for it. Beacon is expecting a much larger revenue source there. (much of this is in the 11/14 court docs, it's a fascinating read)

The sale of the NY plant is not considered a large loss to Beacon and it requires work to be completed, it's also not even generating revenue now as we speak. Even after it gets bought from someone else, they'll need to hire Beacon to complete it as no one else has the expertise to complete it.

Cool stuff and I like what I'm reading here. I haven't seen any red flags on this at all and it looks very favorable to investors.

\\//_