I’m not sure I understand what you are saying here. What do you mean by lack of commercial proof? Dillisioning??? So what do you think was happening?
If you go back a little further in the filings, under PROCESSING on page 6 in the 10K filed 2009-07-15 it says “During 2005 and 2006, we invested in the development of a processing plant at the site of the Dragon Mine that was designed to separate halloysite from non-halloysite material.” Later in the filing it states that NaturalNano was supposed to build a plant at their expense at the Dragon to refine the clay to meet their customers’ needs. They were also supposed to pay for the mining effort to obtain the 500 tons of raw clay for which they paid $250,000. According to a press release this contract was signed in 2004 and the clay was to have been removed by Nov. 2006. Presumably, Jacobson, as CEO of Atlas, would have known about this. Why, then, would he have agreed to hire Price and spend Atlas stockholders’ money to purchase equipment, establish the plant, pay Price’s salary and for marketing nanoclay when NaturalNano was supposed to do it? Jacobson even gave NNAN Atlas stock to cash in – was this to help with the building? They evidently spent it on other things since Atlas hired Price in March 2006 and built their own plant with Atlas money. Why?
Then if we jump ahead to the Dumont era, the brouhaha about the $250,000 NNAN paid for the clay which caused the stock to drop and initiated the investor lawsuits, was over nothing since the contract had expired the previous year. The 8-K filed 8/27/2008 says “The accounting treatment of the $250,000 received from NaturalNano as revenue in 2004 was incorrect. The treatment of such funds as proposed in the October 9, 2007 Press Release was also incorrect. In October, 2007, management determined to account for the transaction as a deposit of funds, reducing previously recorded revenues and increasing long-term liabilities. The Special Committee believes that during the two year term of the contract, the $250,000 should have been treated as a deposit, but after the expiration of the contract in 2006, the entire $250,000 should have been recognized as revenue.”
The lawsuits did, in the end, reveal Jacobson’s stock shenanigans but unfortunately, or fortunately I guess, depending on how you look at it, the lawsuit was settled out of court so there was no opportunity for public disclosure about what really transpired as we never got to hear anyone testify under oath. I’m saying there was a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes that’s not in the SEC filings so you don’t know the whole story.
So – back to the future. Where do we stand? Third party resource eval is done by now, yes? But as others have pointed out, the information as yet to be revealed. Higher quality clay will be processed through the infamous KDS micronizer on-site at the Dragon. Contracts are in place to have lower grade material shipped across the country to Georgia to be further refined, treated, etc. Presumably, should a contract for clay be signed, there is equipment or a contractor and enough feet on the ground at the mine to get the material out, so all that’s needed is a customer. So, how’s the marketing going? They hired Yash Khanna as a consultant after the Atlanta meeting to help out. How’s that working out?
Do you really think as President of Nanoclay and technologies, and being at the mine at will, he had no knowledge of the lack of commercial proof? I read all the reports and share with your dillisioning of this mgt team not landing a sale, but Price? Why are you so hot on someone who sat on the inside knowing alot more than you or I.
Putz – I could go on for pages, although in reality it’s all in the past now and cannot be changed - but take heart: the halloysite nanoclay technology is sound and there is a lot of clay at the Dragon. Surely, it’s just a matter of time. . . . . . but selling a highly technical nanomaterial requires extensive knowledge of the material and the science behind it. There is there is a big difference between being a penny stock mining company (which is what Atlas was) and a supplier of scientific, technical grade nanomaterials.
It is not like selling stocks or timeshares or used cars or Girl Scout cookies and no matter how many or how good your contacts are, you cannot force people to buy. It doesn’t matter how competent or “professional” a salesperson is, if they do not understand the technology – if they cannot explain it in detail to the R&D people at a company that would be a potential customer and help them solve any challenges that may arise during their testing – you will not be able to sell anything. And that is why you needed Ron Price. Licensing four of his NRL patents does NOT give Applied Minerals access to his expertise or depth of knowledge on the subject.
You have to sell a company on the technology FIRST and their research and development will take time. A potential customer has to determine whether the technology based on the use of halloysite nanoclay will result in a significant increase in their product’s performance. They are not going to change their whole process just based solely on your word that it will work. Their determination will require extensive testing by their own R&D people who will, invariably, have questions and need to work through any problems that might come up. You have to have the answers. R&D may take several years – longer if a product requires extensive and expensive testing to meet EPA standards, which would be required if using the clay as a method of controlled release of a biocide (just ask NanoDynamics – they declared bankruptcy before receiving EPA approval).
But since you asked what he did, and several times you have quoted the “one sale” sentence in the 10 K filed 2009-07-28, here’s some food for thought. Are you absolutely positive that the “one sale” sentence tells the whole story?
Under Marketing and Sales Efforts on page 11, just before the “One sale of $900”, it states: “Ronald Price . . . distributed samples of Dragon Mine halloysite to a number of companies.” So, Price was actively marketing, distributing samples and working with the R&D departments of a number of companies on a variety of applications until the fall of 2007, when the Dragon was shut down. Again, in the 10K filed 10.2.09 under “Result of Operations” on page 22: “The decrease is primarily due to the suspension of activity at the Dragon Mine in late 2007, which was carried through the entire year ended December 31, 2008.” How was Price to sell clay when the facility was shut down? How could any salesperson in good conscious pitch a customer when there was no way of knowing if and when the facility would reopen? And when commercial quantities of clay would be available? Also, the NanoClay and Technologies website was pulled off the web in August 2007. Without any means of advertising or communication, how was Price supposed to sell clay?
There is a lot of information in the SEC filings if you take the time to read them and THINK about what you are reading. In addition to the two10Ks cited above, read the one from 2009-07-15 as well. I could give you some highlights if you don’t have time to read them yourself, but like I said, it’s in the past and only interesting in that context.
Just an interesting tidbit: Applied Minerals had been listed (note the past tense) as a sponsor of the Society of Plastics Engineers TSP automotive plastics convention that's coming up the beginning of October in Michigan. They are no longer listed as a sponsor. Wonder what else they are doing for marketing.