Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Orbital Engine Corp. Ltd. (OE) Message Board

  • chris72 chris72 Jan 15, 1999 4:04 PM Flag

    OE Redeems Convertible Note

     

    What impact if anything will this have on the stock price?

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Teeiiz, re your post 4070 on Nissan
      patents.

      Good post, and a nice contribution. I'd like to see
      this kind of material archived on a web site
      somewhere.

      I find it all but impossible to analyse patent
      documents. When I try to read one, my eyes glaze over and my
      brain goes to sleep.

      I don't know of any other
      investor who performs this kind of analysis.

    • The T/A looks like crap, but thanks for
      asking...

      OE looked like it was going to go positive on the
      MACD, but failed to break through, stochastics say
      overbought and the we reamain in yet another
      down-trend...

      Looking a little further down the road, I think the next
      few trading days are pretty crucial. OE has already
      tested the bottom twice, and as they say, stocks that
      successfully testing the bottom twice is bullish, but testing
      the bottom three times is a very, very bad sign...
      Still a little room before we get there
      though.

      If it doesn't break through, then I think you have a
      very shallow inverted head and shoulders, which is
      mildly bullish.

      Long-term, there is even less to
      like...

      Aren't you glad you
      asked?

      Cheers,

      J

      BTW, Yahoo wouldn't let anyone post for about three
      hours today... You'd think a $27B company could keep a
      message board operating.

    • Hello Renneber,

      A few days back you
      questioned whether DCX might obtain, as part of a possible
      linkup with Nissan, any valuable GDI intellectual
      property. With the axoim, "Only the paranoid survive." in
      mind, I am always concerned about that very type of
      thing and the ramifications to OE's future. In an
      attempt to ease my fears I have done some patent
      searching over the last few months and, as you know, have
      posted some of OE's and IFP's patents here. I must
      stress that I am a layperson and, a patent search turns
      into very convoluted and interconnnected web of info.
      My observations should be duly discounted. That
      said, I do think one can get a flavor of the work being
      done.

      As it seems tenable, based on events up to now, that
      OE has something the automakers are looking to
      circumvent or better with an "in-house" design, I have
      concentrated on recent patents only. If a crack in OE's
      portfolio has appeared I would think it confined to patents
      of the last year, in patents applied for and not yet
      granted or in discoveries not yet public. The latter
      category, for me, defines a goodly portion of the risk in
      an OE investment. I recall reading somewhere a few
      years ago a statement by someone at OE, that part of
      the patent "game" was to try to guess how far ahead
      of the competition you were and to sometimes take
      the calculated gamble that you were better off not
      even filing as this could give the competition a clue
      where you were headed. This axe could swing both ways
      as the same strategy is avaliable to everyone. This
      is a very advanced level chess game.

      Re
      Nissan:
      http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US05720253__&language=en
      I take this to be single fluid (HP) injection
      similar to everyone elses, with attempts to aim and swirl
      the injection off a surface of the piston towards the
      plug. I wouldn't think DCX would find anything
      revolutionary here. I haven't done any searching for Chrysler,
      but based on some of their DI 2S work in the past, I
      would guess they have more intellectual property in DI
      than Nissan.

      Re the Pulse Fuel Injector of
      Splitcycle's:
      http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US05735468__&language=en
      No drawings. I'll let everyone draw their own
      conclusions about this one.

      An opinion for everyone,
      FWIW: This is a huge and very complicated field of
      play. What little of it I can see tells me OE has
      something desired by the main participants. It carries much
      weight for me personally that Kim Schlunke and Ken
      Johnsen (among dozens of others at OE) have spent their
      entire adult lives immersed in this specific area. Mr
      Schlunke's comments in the Q&A session warrant careful
      consideration. Specifically, the mention he felt it significant
      that neither Bosch nor Denso (Bosch, Siemens and Denso
      are #s 1,2&3 in fuel system sales, worldwide) had
      ever attempted to cross Orbital's patent lines and his
      use of the word, "stranglehold" in describing OE's
      grip on this market, are powerful proclamations.
      Orbital has stated for years that environmental regs
      would drive their tech towards adoption. My amatuer
      patent opinions and observations about the state of
      tightening emission regs around the world reassure me they
      are keenly aware of what is coming. I cannot find
      good evidence to the contrary. It's not they have no
      competition, but they are a formidable competitor in their own
      right. Their sense of timing has been, in retrospect,
      premature on several counts. It makes waiting an anguishing
      affair but does not change the big picture. For me, it's
      assigning a probability they know more about their work
      than I ever can, as well as one for the possibility of
      unexpected events outside Orbital's or my control. If I have
      calculated incorrectly, I will suffer from my own lack of
      diligence. Only thoughts.

    • that closely.
      I've been a very harsh critic
      of OE's management in the past. But with the
      convertible out of the way and the amount of progress with 2
      stroke deals over the last six months. Things look much
      better.

    • If the bear is awake you shoot it with a gun or run like hell.

      Don't fool yourself, MI is not stupid.

      I wish I had never entered this cave.

    • I haven't been able to locate my annual report.

    • According to our trusty 1998 annual report, page
      55, MI holds 3,621,613 ordinary shares which is
      equivalent to: 452,702 ADR's. Less than we as a group hold.
      If MI is smart, they'll hold onto their position and
      lobby the auto industry for cleaner cars.

    • I agree with you Josh. Although I would be
      curious to know how many shares the St of MI currently
      owns, I don't think I'd be calling them to find out and
      to ask them "when they were going to sell now that
      OE has closed the MI plant".

      Of course,
      someone could call and ask if their holdings were a
      matter of public record and how this information could
      be obtained without mentioning a particular stock.

    • View More Messages