What part of the difference between "scam" and, as you say, "sub par penny stock" is not understood? Those of us that support this company are not saying that mismanagement may not be a factor as was the factor in every company you listed, which had legitimate products and services, but were mismanaged and ultimately shut down for illegal practices. AFPW has not been shut down and unless you have some phenomenal insider information for which you can provide evidence to demonstrate a "scam" AFPW is simply performing "sub par" due to business costs exceeding profitability. This is a development stage company with a previously non-existent product. Kinks need to be worked out through field tests and customer feedback OVER TIME. The only legitimate question with AFPW is if it can survive long enough to create a product that meets or exceeds expectations.
Remember, Alumifuel is the core of AFPW. Cade could've made millions selling the rights to the otherwise unmatched (technically, unduplicated by anyone else despite INDUSTRY efforts) performance of the product. Instead, Cade has chosen to market it directly through the PBIS. Alumifuel is sound, the PBIS is the question. Does it perform the way the Air Force wants? If it does it will be the breakthrough we need. If not, who knows what the next step is. It could mean a partnership with a company that CAN produce a functional reactor. It could also mean Cade gives up, sells the IP, and shuts down AFPW which will suck, but isn't illegal. Either way, no scam here. AFPW
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
