A throwback to the days of the younger Saxe manning the message boards, and the Harary family ambulance with the SPD demo window.
Leopards don't change their spots, as any long time fraud investigator can tell you.
What is the matter with REFR? Same as always. No foreseeable profit potential in commercial use of SPD.
If there were, a major licensee would take a stake and light a fire under marketing and product development before even the puny remaining patents expire.
All the perceived successes are paid for, and investors continue to provide an undeserved high life style for the management.
Just as I predicted, no one can point out a recent enforceable patent that protects this 80+ year old technology, or the company that has been losing money trying to commercialize that technology for 50 years. (All the while, paying themselves richly).
No one has presented evidence either that any of the licensees are making money off SPD. Mercedes may be using it as a loss leader to give a "gee-whiz" factor to top end models, and I suspect REFR subsidies to keep the very few other active uses going forward.
The clearest indication that this is not a money making technology is the lack of activity on the part of the majority of licensees, and the lack of interest in any alternative development using expired patents. Remember, the bard/McJud claims improvements shown in more recent patents, but can't point anything significant.
The motivation must come from REFR R&D money, because those companies obviously are not making money on the project.
At the same time, in the unlikely event that SPD becomes popular, these secondary patents will put the licensees in control, not REFR.
As expected, neither you or anyone else can point out which patent or patents erect an effective barrier to using and developing SPD technology independent of REFR. The only barriers are economic. That is, it just isn't worth it.
Every now and then, I ask the REFR longs to point out a specific non-expired patent that provides a barrier to entry for a potential competitor. They have never come up with an answer.
Neither has any company shown an inclination to develop SPD on a different track. At one time a few companies showed modest interest, but that was more than ten years ago.
xavierducats • Nov 21, 2014
What a joke, "earnings growth". REFR will lose money this year, and will lose money next year. Management takes home fat paychecks and have been living off of investors for nearly 30 years as a public company. "Potential" has been touted that entire time, and never delivered. Some of their most important ex-licensees back the Electro Chromic alternative to SPD
xavierducats • Jan 12, 2015
What are you pumpers and promoters going to say when REFR reports losses for 4th Q '14, loses money 1st Q "15, and shows a loss for all 2015? Will you then admit that SPD is not catching on? Will you, Lester in particular, just change IDs and begin a new story?
My guess is that the line will remain as always and forever, "Just wait until next year."
refr.class • May 11, 2015
Xavier, no one needs to talk about the latest numbers since we were all expecting them. And second quarter won't be all that exciting either. But come the 3Q results, you and your ilk will be devastated by the S Class flexing its muscles. All this was laid out months ago by Joe Harary.
xavierducats • May 11, 2015 3:05 PM
You were saying this as recently as last June. Success for REFR has always been just around the corner, and always will be.
So, if it in a "slide in" presentation, whatever that is, it is not unannounced. The expectation of the contracts is already built into the stock price. Like I said, it is likely not to happen anyway, given the REFR record of making phantom and meaningless announcements, especially when they are offered as "forward looking".
How would you know that.?
1. Joe has mentioned them, in which case they they could easily be like so many other pre-announcements by Joe that never happen.
2. You are disclosing inside information. (the least likely)
3. You are just making it up. (most likely)
I can't deny that possibility, since all RFI agreements appear to be confidential, at least in some important aspects. Joe did, however, give many broad hints in the intervening years that other auto makers were about to follow MB's lead. That includes the very first conference call after the introduction.
If sales are on an upward trajectory, and profitability is at hand, what is Joe doing flogging the stock again at the Craig-Hallum conference?
Shouldn't he be conferencing with the execs of one of the rumored/alleged/imagined auto makers coming onboard? More than four and a half years it has been since the MB introduction.
Get real! No one considers E-Ink to be included in the SPD category. Once again, though, if your figures are taken literally, the graph is again completely wrong. I bet that report didn't cost much more than $4,700, and I bet it was commissioned by a company that intended to use it to promote their stock. Singling out RFI like this "Research Frontiers develops, licenses, and commercializes the SPD-SmartGlass Technology which is used in automotive, aircraft, marine and other applications" leads one to expect which company.
BTW, What models of BMW have included adjustable tint, and why would a research company make that statement?
The graph on the preview page exposes that report as total BS. We know form the SEC filings what the real sales of SPD products was. (Or can tell pretty close by knowing what the royalty percentage is) Note that they say the scale of the graph is in billions. In any case, if SPD sales increase in proportion to the size of the bars on the graph, REFR will still not be profitable in 2022.
What names have you used previously on this board?
SPDiots like yourself have been promising BMW and Audi "soon" ever since MB introduced the Magic Sky in 2011. Are they any closer? Probably not.
Will Mercedes make REFR profitable? Probably not.
Will there be profits from architectural installations. Definitely not. They are just for show.
Will Boeing adopt SPD? Not a chance.
If REFR is lucky, there will be an out of court settlement netting nothing significant except for the illusion of legitimacy. Probably not, though.
There is no one other than REFR shills who are the least excited about SPD, a 75+ YO technology littered with expired patents.
Luxury yacht and mass transit? Once again, for show only. No arms length sales.
Museums, need I say "for show"?
Who are my cronies, refr.class? How long have I been bashing REFR exactly? How wrong have I been?
REFR has had 30 years as a publicly traded corporation to work on those issues, with basically the same management as now. Bard has been offering encouraging posts and optimistic predictions for nearly as long as this Yahoo forum has existed. Through the duration, many of the past and present REFR licensees could have ramped up the marketing program any time they saw potential. Instead, important licensees (GE, Air Products) dropped out entirely, and one (MSC, now Bekaert) even paid to get out of their license. Another handed over SPD patents for pocket change (Glaverbel). Yet another teamed up with Sage on EC (St. Gobain). Most of the rest listed on the Smartglass website are inactive with SPD or totally out of business.
Some were shams from the very start, yet they are still considered licensees.
Someone mentioned Traco recently. Back in 2003 REFR released PR claiming Traco was ready for a major roll-out of SPD windows. Nevermind that the available film was trash.
Anyone who believes what comes out of Woodbury, or any of the REFR acolytes and pimps, will eventually learn an expensive lesson.
The pumpers don't want to admit that "standard" means standard option. In other words, Beechcraft will allow the windows to be installed at their service facility. Basically, we are back to the same misleading PR that was used to pump the share price in 2007. This time they don't have a crooked fund manager and financial columnist to hype the stock, so the market is taking no notice.
What exactly does "standard equipment" mean, and why can I find no press or pictures from Beechcraft?
Yet, Joe and the promoters were hinting at Boeing for the big Aerospace announcement. How many of these Inspectec windows do you think will really be installed? How much revenue for REFR? I bet you get no projections from Joe, and still no profits in 2015.