News Focus
News Focus
icon url

PLAYER ONE

09/16/12 9:09 PM

#58622 RE: 236T568 #58618

Actually, if you read that patent, it is not the same mixtures or the same use as GTGP and it is unproven. If you are a chemical engineer, I would appreciate it if you would enlighten me an others how it is better as it hasn't been tested by the DOE or anyone else for that matter and was filed in 2010 and hasn't ever been used, just claims and a patent. Have seen NADA in any publication within the DOE or remediation publication as well.

the original inventor of the MBS technology recently patented a new, more advances process which makes the technology used by GTGP Obsolete.

icon url

tincup2

09/16/12 9:17 PM

#58624 RE: 236T568 #58618

original inventor HAHA
show me the proof?
show JV showing dates of expiration?
tell me why you are here?
thank you in advance
icon url

Bobinsd

09/17/12 12:03 AM

#58719 RE: 236T568 #58618

"In addition, the original inventor of the MBS technology recently patented a new, more advanced process which makes the technology used by GTGP Obsolete."

This statement in itself is patently ridiculous. Any new technique has to be price effective, and it also has to be marketed. There may also be previous non-compete clauses in previous agreements.
icon url

buccaneer1961

09/17/12 12:04 AM

#58720 RE: 236T568 #58618

gtgp has the monopoly on mbs...