Fri, Sep 19, 2014, 6:30 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

Superconductor Technologies Inc. Message Board

r2d2_n_c3po 166 posts  |  Last Activity: 5 hours ago Member since: Nov 2, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    General Cable Superconducting Co.

    by warren06 Sep 17, 2014 9:21 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po 5 hours ago Flag

    So the UNMASKED IDIOTIC LYING TROLL once again shows his very embarrassed face after his total FUBAR comment about narrower wire being able to carry more current than a wider wire. And guess what he does it again!!!! And to make it worse he ignored what I stated in my earlier post about Roebel cables which is one of General Cables specialties, especially using 2G HTS wire.

    If you go to their "Our Technology" page and select the first white paper. In this paper you will see the special shape of the HTS wire in order to build one of these cables. On page 5 they indicate it is not possible to bend YBCO HTS tape to this shape. Then on page 6 they make this statement
    " We have invented an alternative method to produce a CTC using 2G wire. This
    involves manufacturing pre-cut strands in the general shape shown in Figure 4."

    The width of the precut strands after this cutting process is either 2mm or 5mm (as the UILT correctly, for a change, stated). But in order to achieve this finished width the original must be either 4mm or 10mm twice the finished width. In fact in this case wider is better because there will be less waste. In fact a 12mm width could theoretically allow 5 2mm conductors to be sliced from one such piece and 10mm wide piece allows for four 4mm pieces. So, as usua,l his conclusion is 100% wrong. That's what happens when one's judgment is clouded by irrational emotions.

  • Reply to

    Next raise

    by hundoghouse Sep 17, 2014 11:22 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po 21 hours ago Flag

    They don't need to do a raise. There are outstanding warrants that can provide them up to $22+ Million. They cancelled their outstanding shelf offering when they struck that deal. The warrant holders infused over $3 Million in March. I suggest you do some reading.

  • Reply to

    Next raise

    by hundoghouse Sep 17, 2014 11:22 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 7:55 PM Flag

    Since Aug 11, 2,647,600 shares of STI have been traded. Since 1 July, 4,216,400 shares have been traded.

    All the big share trade days occurred when the price was mainly $3 or higher, with a couple in the high $290's. Only two days (recent) where more than 100,000 shares were traded and the closing price was $2.67 and $2.80 and on one of those day's some shares traded above $3, and the other in the mid-upper $2.70's.

    So there has certainly been some volume but I think only a relatively small amount are due to warrants. They want a sell price over $3

  • Reply to

    Next raise

    by hundoghouse Sep 17, 2014 11:22 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 2:57 PM Flag

    There won't be a future offering as long there are outstanding warrants. Those 8.8 million warrants are worth $22.616 million to STI, which is enough to add another line run the business for a while.

  • Reply to

    Next raise

    by hundoghouse Sep 17, 2014 11:22 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 11:50 AM Flag

    I agree with Japan. STI cancelled their long term shelf-offering after the last deal which gave warrants to the investors. Those investors still have 8.8 million warrants (@$2.57 each for STI), and the stock price is unlikely to fluctuate significantly when they are exercised (which I believe is going on now... the rfecent dips could be from their trying to sell into the market. If you want to buy (no opinion offered on that) then I do think this is the period before any big announcement (e.g. an order) that will likely cause a significant rise in price. I'm guessing there will be some continued pricing pressure until the investors have complete their exericising of their warrants. My guess is that they will exercise 1- 1.5 million warrants before they stop and we see a PR about it.

  • The last week the share dived from a high of $3.20 on Sept 9 to a low of $2.65, all above the strike price of the warrants. Trading volume for all but two of those days was on the order of 100k+ shares. So who was driving the share price down? Were they trying to load up on cheap shares from the market to sell back when the price rises?

  • Reply to

    General Cable Superconducting Co.

    by warren06 Sep 17, 2014 9:21 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:59 AM Flag

    That's the PR I was referring to. The PR about the Cable Demo came out about a week or so later!

  • Reply to

    General Cable Superconducting Co.

    by warren06 Sep 17, 2014 9:21 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:57 AM Flag

    Warren,

    Right before the "cable demo" project was announced there was an announcement about General cable and STI's wire.

    I speculated at the time that I thought that General cable was the Cable Demo customer. I think I was right.

    HTS wire for Roebel cable applications is much wider (10mm??) than that for power cable which is 4mm. In addition it is cut into distinctive shapes (I think there is some info on the General Cable website about this), because the HTS wire is laid up in a pattern where one wire overlays several others (again I think there is info about this on their website).

    THAT WOULD EXPLAIN WHY STI HAS FOCUSED ON 10mm WIDE WIRE.

    And note! THIS IS THE FIRST STRATEGIC ALLIANCE...MEANING THE FIRST STAGE 3 CUSTOMER!!!!!

    So does this mean there will be a capital infusion of some sort from them? I guess we'' have to wait and see! But that sure should be a sign for the current investors to convert some of those warrents to shares (which I believe they have already started to do.

    Great news!

  • r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:48 AM Flag

    I think a search will show that I stated a relationship was in the works with General cable quite a while ago. which I believed the "fool" quickly pooh poohed

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:45 AM Flag

    Hmm so I see you didn't study engineering at and you don't understand basic electrical principals.

    And you are the only moronic idiot comparing HTS wire to a quilt!

    Current density along with the cross sectional area of a conductor defines the current capacity. If the current density varies along the length or within the cross sectional area then the current capacity varies as well.
    Minimum Ic is the lowest value of current that will flow through a conductor whose current density varies.

    Comparing a narrow width of conducting material with a wider width of the same material, given both are the same thickness and uniformity then the following is absolute scientific fact:
    The current densities are the same. (e.g. 500A/cm-w). The cross sectional area of the wider material is greater, thus it can carry MORE CURRENT NOT LESS like the UILT claims. He's 100% wrong!

    Longer lengths are better only if they are needed. In proving out a production prototype, yield and uniformity of current density are far more important than length. And the machine did do a full capacity run with 100 yield. (The UILT is hung up on the fact the STI did not announce a 100m run with 4mm wide wire- they didn't need to do that to prove their process). Length will be demonstrated on the production system whose assembly and testing is underway with the receipt of the deposition chamber.)
    The Fault current limiters (FCL) do not require 100m lengths, nor does the cable demo project (which needs less than 10m lengths per JQ). In fact none of the projects required long lengths at the current time. Will they need longer lengths later? Of course, some will, others like the FCL will not.

    So the UILT's statement: "less area is better when one is trying to get current from point A to point B" is 100% wrong!

    As for my earlier post, there were two such announcements the next quarter and I made no such statement suggesting any difficulty was cause a loss of orders. That would be inane... like him!

  • Reply to

    GE's New Space Frame Tower

    by captechinvestors Sep 16, 2014 8:39 PM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:24 AM Flag

    So how much did you lose? 99%??? It must have been a BUNDLE$$$$$$$ . The fact is you were simply too stupid to be able to foresee the decline and r/s that occurred in March 2013, after which instead of pumping STI you turned into a lying crybaby whiner! LOL! LOL! LOL!

    Clearly others weren't as stupid as you were!

  • Reply to

    Whiners Be Gone!

    by calrenwick Sep 10, 2014 9:00 PM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:21 AM Flag

    Correction! Japan KNOWS that 50m of 10mm wide wire is MORE wire than 100m of 4mm wide wire when both have the same current rating. ( The reality is that the edges of the 10mm wide tape overlap one another and so the two are equivalent, just as JQ stated and the UILT choosed to ignore/lie about. The first is also represents 100% yield at FULL CAPACITY!

    Obviously the UNMASKED IDIOTIC LYING TROLL doesn't know what 100% yield means or his is deliberately lying... actually it is likely both... he is really stupid!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 17, 2014 10:13 AM Flag

    So your justification of the 400 km criticism is based on a post by Japankokura who was likely using numbers cited by the self-proclaimed and now de0bunked "fool". How dishonest.

    I see you don't understand the concept of STI's stated 100% yield at 500 A/cm-w. Just another illustration of just how stupid (or dishonest) you are! LOL! LOL! LOL!

    Posting early aren't you. Planning on going to bed early eh? Is your mommy making you do that?

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 16, 2014 3:58 PM Flag

    The machine in Austin is capable of doing 100m lengths at 4mm or 50m lengths at 10mm, Both are full capacity runs. It's the total area of the HTS tape that's exposed when the tape is wrapped around a drum. The 10 mm tape must overlap itself a bit. From a recent STIC presentation (page2) "High throughput and large HTS growth AREA"
    Slide 3 describing SDP "Slit 100 mm into various width based on customers request: 3 mm / 4 mm / 10 mm / 12 mm / 30 mm
    Thickness uniformity of width 96% - large process window with only 4% used for slitting of edges."
    About IBAD "IBAD process capacity of 1 km length at 1000 km/yr rate matching SDP
    New feature: multi-lane RHEED Multi-lane multi-pass Upgrade"

    BTW the UNMASKED IDIOTIC LYING TROLL SHOULD THINK ABOUT JUST HOW THAT LAST STATEMENT APPLIES TO HIS POSTS... VIRTUALLY 100%

    By gosh I think he has a fixation on length! Must be BECAUSE of his own SHORT COMINGS!

    What is the greater area: a tape 4mm wide x 100m long or a tape 10mm wide by 50m long. ANSWER a tape 10mm wide by 50m has a greater area! Its 25% LARGER. The drum in the RCE-CDR machine has a finite area. The maximum tape area JQ says it can handle is the 50m long 10mm wide tape... i.e., Full capacity, but guess what that 100m x 4mm tape also only uses 80% of the area...yet the UILT says this is max capacity! I say he is FOS!
    Remember LYING TROLL "A lie is not a fact no matter how many times the lie is repeated." Your incessant repetition doesn't change the facts.

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 16, 2014 3:32 PM Flag

    Japan,

    Make no mistake, the UNMASKED IDIOTIC LYING TROLL (UILT) AKA mask_ipx_spx knows exactly what he is doing. He fully understands that he is repeating the same tired old lies again and again, trying to get you to respond. He's been doing this now for the past few months. I play along because we are getting newbies here because folks recognize that STI has an excellent opportunity for success (but they could still fail...maybe). I play along just so I can destroy his credibility because it becomes so obvious to all what a liar he is. And I especially love it when the d*Ck headjohnson chimes in on his side, because that reveals what a cretin he is also! They are also opportunities to put out factual information about STI's process. You are wasting your time addressing your comments to the UILT, instead address them to the broader audience and point out how stupid and perfidious he is! LOL! LOL!LOL!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 16, 2014 2:24 PM Flag

    The whining crybaby is like a broken record... stuck in a bad groove... he's too obvious... deliberately repeating the same lies over and over. He clearly knows he's wrong... he thinks he's pulling someone's chain... he is.... his own! LOL! LOL! LOL!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 16, 2014 8:47 AM Flag

    Whine whine! Dumbest (The UILT) is really ranting like the crybaby we know him to be.

    1) HIs first statement, besides being stupid, is a lie. We've said that 50m of 12mm wide wire is a full capacity run for the 100m RCE-CDR machine.
    2) The industry standard for wire used in power cables is 4mm...even the "fool" knows that. But "dumbest" apparently does not!
    3) SuNAM does not advertise 12 mm wide 600A wire in 150' lengths. That's simply another lie.
    4) STI's wire performance is clearly superior to the competition. Dumbest (aka UILT the crybaby) can't help himself...he's a compulsive liar.
    5) As to his last paragraph and to answer his question, I think the UILT is the one who is stupid enough to think that the final coating was precisely defined for a new product in advanced development. I also think that IF THEIR CABLE DEMO CUSTOMER WAS NOT HAPPY WITH STI'S PERFORMANCE THEY WOULD HAVE DROPPED THEM LONG AGO... AND WHY HAVEN'T THEY? BECAUSE STI WILL BE ABLE TO PRODUCE 500A/CM-W WIRE ON DEMAND AND IN LENGTHS SIGNIFICANTLY EXCEEDING 150M WITHOUT THE NEED FOR "SPECIAL ORDERS". THE CABLE DEMO CUSTOMER KNOWS THAT AND SO DO THE OTHER CUSTOMERS WHO ARE TESTING STI WIRE.
    6) DUMBEST (aka UILT) is also lying about the use of the R&D machine. The cable demo was planned for the 100M RCE-CDR which was designed as a production prototype. The machine was late because of design changes that had to be made, so the STI said they would try to produce the wire on the R&D machine. The UILT lied when he stated the cable demo wire was 6m long, (another dumb assumption stated as a fact by the UILT) The only statement made about cable demo wire length was that its length was a single digit. It could be 6 or 5 or 4 or 3 or ... The reality was that the R&D machine wasn't able to do the job. We don't know what it was able to do because STI was silent about that. But what we do know, because JQ has told us, is the 100M machine can repeatedly produce the wire needed in the lengths needed!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 15, 2014 10:14 PM Flag

    Double ? Yes of course I'm seeing two aszholes... you and UILT! LOL! LOL! LOL! BTW You really need new glasses! You are blinded by your stupidity!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 15, 2014 4:12 PM Flag

    Well it certainly is obvious the UILT failed basic math...either that or he is repeating the same lie over and over.

    SuNAM does not indicate how long the wire is that they offer on their website but they do indicate that the performance listed is dependent on length. The UILT refers to their catalog...hmm What they call a "Superconductivity Catalol" is really nothing more than a marketing brochure but in it is states "piece length 100~150 meter". It does not state the performance at 150m. If the UILT applied the same thickheaded interpretation to their "catalog" he would be mocking it as well! But he didn't lose his butt on SuNAM.

    Their HTS wire spec also defines available piece lengths of 50m, 100m, and 150m, but does not indicate the Current ratings.

    He is also too stupid to realize that 600 A at 12mm (=1.2cm) is the same as 500 A/cm-w. Thus SuNAM doesn't surpass anybody in current performance. STI clearly won't be able to advertise lengths longer than 100m until the new line comes up...but then they will be able to produce longer higher performing lengths than anybody else.

    The pilot machine has definitely proven STI's process both in terms of performance quality/yield and repeatability.

    The finishing layer process that is causing the problem is a process applied by a 3rd party. That's proven... so why does he continue to lie about this... perfidity or stupidity?... actually I believe it is both!

    The finishing layer is not a screw up. It is, IMO based upon JQ's statements, a problem that the customer knows the type of material he wants for the protective layer, but not the detailed specifications, so it is down to an experimental process... or as JQ's characterizes it, dialing in the recipe! Once they have the right recipe for the desired mechanical properties they will move right along.

    BTW the share price is almost certainly not falling due to the finishing layer for the cable demo, and to even suggest it is the height of stupidity!

  • Reply to

    HTS progress

    by mask_ipx_spx Aug 27, 2014 1:15 AM
    r2d2_n_c3po r2d2_n_c3po Sep 15, 2014 11:27 AM Flag

    Gee I wonder why he doesn't quote the rest of the description. Like the part that says it is being done be a 3rd party, or the part that indicates it is a trial and error process (likely because their customer knows only the mechanical performance they want, but not the recipe!

    "I mean we’ve got one shot at just putting layers on the stuff. If it’s the way you want it, then great. And if it’s not, then you start over. I mean that’s the nature of the beast.. Frankly that’s why this is a difficult business, that’s why it’s I think challenging for some that don't have a repeatable process. At the same time, my belief is that once you figure out exactly what that process, what that recipe is and exactly what it needs to be, our manufacturing process allows us to -- the part that we control, we can dial it in and do it consistently. And WE'RE (STI) WORKING WITH PEOPLE (3rd party) on these finishing layers. And I think once we know exactly what that finishing layer is going to be, THEY'VE (3rd party) SHOWN THE ABILITY TO REPLICATE IT and be consistent as well."
    There is a lot more discussion on this in the most recent CC transcript available from Seeking Alpha, but you first need to listen to the call as your read the transcript. You will need to make corrections to that transcript, which is considerably better than the previous one, but still needy!

    In any event the above illustrates how deceptive and deceitful the UILT really is!

SCON
2.91+0.07(+2.46%)Sep 19 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.