Lester and the other paid pumpers are using exactly the same worn out lines that were being laid on thick when I first heard about this message board. Al Malvino (how's his health?) summed it up with his slogan, "Keep your eye on the prize."
It's an age old con man trick. Hold up the promises of a fortune in the near future, and distract the mark from any details that conflict with the story he is peddling. The negatives for REFR keep piling up, but the song stays the same.
Patents are effectively kaput.
Most major licensees have had no SPD activity in 5-10-even more- years.
Pricing for SPD in buildings totally rules it out. There has not even been a decent test.
Neither Boeing or Airbus have an interest, and the smaller planes announced will probably never fly with SPD as standard equipment.
There is no retrofit market. Think there is? Name one installation in the last five years.
REFR marketing department is essentially AWOL.
Joe is obviously scouting for a candidate to partner in the next PIPE pump and dump.
Do you claim to have inside information, or was Joe spinning stories at the annual meeting?
Fact is, there is no surge in business coming down the pike. REFR is not making projections, even the single pathetic analyst is not expecting a profit, licensees are showing no activity, and no one who is in the know is interested in investing in REFR.
REFR shorts are in a winning position, and REFR has no future beyond demonstration projects and further PIPES. How much upside can there be with all the important patents expired? No need to worry, or ever cover.
Could be at ETRM. Kevin has bailed there and from AMSC, but still holds a major losing position at WPRT.
I do give him credit for selling about $10M of IMAX when it was high.
KD could be liquidating his REFR, and we would never know it.
Plus, you have no idea to what extent, and where in the supply chain, the installations were subsidized by REFR. The same goes for automobile use. At least in the architectural sector REFRs monetary contribution is out in the open.
The notion that SPD is just a slowly developing technology was being pushed liberally the first time I encountered REFR, fifteen years ago. Ludicrous comparison have been made between SPD and electric lighting, xerography, anti-lock brakes, and now implausibly, biotechnology. All the comparisons omit the fact that all of these other technologies developed much faster, despite requiring incomparably greater requirements in investment and research. Also glossed over is the drop-out rate of companies once said to have interest in SPD, a rate that exceeds 90%. Some of the drop outs have embraced competing technologies, and competing technologies have attracted partners and large scale funding.
Most REFR patents have expired, including all the important ones. Despite the lack of protection, the relative low cost of re-engineering any details still under patent, and the lack of any market leadership and name brand recognition for SPD technology, there are no competitors in sight.
The technology has been around for 90 years. SPD film has been available for ten years. What you see now is about what you are going to get: minimal revenues, excessive salaries for officers, misleading press releases and repeated PIPEs.
REFR picks up $5M at a time from "investors" who soon fade away into the shadows. View raises $500M, including equity stake from a former REFR licensee. Sage has big name equity investment also. Yet, Joe H. insists that SPD is the leading smart glass technology. That's why Joe has as much credibility as Tommy Flanagan.