TheEEStory.com

Business, and technological oddities that make you go 'huh?'

1. KP could fund whole project, why didn't they.
2. Mort Topfer could fund whole project, why didn't they.
3. Lightevs license, EEStor needs money.
4. Zenn license, EEStor needs money
5. LM license, no money exchanged hands.
6. EEStor company is not new, been around since 2001.
7. Zenn investing money into AEC (new power source), and AEC is now gone.
8. Announcements like permittivity but at low voltage, i.e. no energy density can be calculated.
9. DW says no new science, if EESU exists (permittivity+HV), it's *'new science'. *'new science' = New unknown method of creating ceramic capacitor with ultra high energy density.
10. DW, says to public it works, but no proof to public.
11. Not one company (on public record) has said they’ve seen a prototype/sample (excluding EEStor.)
12. DW says it's easy to manufacture, though it's been many years now.
13. DW says EESU will be safe, I've read up on patents, nothing to date in patents can back up this if component is cracked/crushed.
14. Changing release dates, i.e. 2007, 2008, 2009.
15. Zenn PR goes to the effort of correcting people when they say Zenn has a prototype, but not on other significant wrong facts.
16. Zenn Says they visit EEStor frequently, yet they delay announcements like it's all new to them.
17. Recent AGM, Zenn speaker acknowledges permittivity milestones is what *really* determines if EESU can exist or not. Since Zenn says they work closely with EEStor, one would think this would be determined a long time ago.
18. IC says “… ZMC has always had internal and 3rd party subject matter experts who are knowledgeable…” Yet why did they invest in AEC then?
19. If EEStor patents did work, it would have been copied already by countries that don’t uphold patent law.
20. IC said last year that it's "Imminent"
21. KP is touting other battery technologies now.
22. DW is co-founder of Tulip Systems, the company is now is gone.
23. Richard S. Weir (not talking about DW) is also a co-founder of EEStor, but also works for a internet marketing company ‘Opnix Inc.’
Added from Zawy post below.
24. There's no physics theory that supports the idea of any material doing more than 2% of what they claim.
25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis.
26. The most intelligent experts in the field have the greatest skepticism "beyond fantasy".
27. EEStor's most highly-valued agreement is with a photographer's company that has a dismal financial history of assembling pre-made parts for fancy golf carts.
28. Billions of these capacitors are already made each years at 20 times the cost EEStor claims it can do. Even cost of pure BT does not jive with making $5,000 units.
29. Past Weir and Nelson investors lost all their investment.
30. None of their 17 or so patents have ever been used in a commercial product (that i know of).
31. There are no positive indications that EEStor will ever do what they claim.
32. PET cannot withstand more than 0.5% of the voltage they want to apply.
From MW
33. EEStor destroyed all their prototypes in destructive testing
From Spaceballs_3000
34. SME said "he does not think EEStor will succeed."
35. SME said "it was still sketchy information and it is "not the obvious measurement one would want to make to demonstrate the claims unless they are hiding something. "
36. SME said "... Bottom line is the jury is still out, there is a lot yet to be shown."
37. SME said I think these people are scientists and I think they have made an interesting discovery but their explanations of what they have discovered are not reasonable...
38. ZENN Confirms EEStor's Third-Party Certified Permittivity Results, but no mention of energy density numbers, or having it tested at high voltage ~4,000v.
39. From (SME) Mike Lanagan, publicly we only have 25% of the information needed to compute energy density to date. i.e. capacitance (unknown), breakdown voltage (unknown), volume (unknown), Loss (known)
40. From IC I got a call from Dick Weir late in 2002 and he was at the point where he and his partner Carl Nelson were getting ready to commercialize the technology that they had developed 10 years previously.
41. Mike Bergeron (VP of engineering at ZENN) interview: "So, I too am anxiously awaiting at voltage testing.", "I'll be the absolute true believer when I get to test it at voltage."
42. Mike Bergeron (VP of engineering at ZENN) interview: "... But at the time I was working for Chrysler. And Dick had approached me and I brought this opportunity up to Chrysler.", "Well, obviously it didn't go."
43. Mort Topfer has left EEStor. *Note he has left AMD also too.
44. Interview with Mort Topfer, "B: And so..... it has the energy density that they say that it has?" "Topfer: Well, they showed me reports that say that. Correct."
45. Few EEStor investors passed up the chance to invest more into EEStor, thus Zenn is able to get more, and now owns approximately 10.7% of the equity of EEStor. Why would existing EEStor investor(s) pass up this chance? (discussion)
46. Missed 2009 delivery: Ian Clifford - ... EEStor made the public statement that they anticipate having at-voltage components verified independently by September of this year and deliver of production prototype EESU to us by then end of 2009. That’s directly from EEStor. ...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof :)

Last edited Thu, 31 Dec 2009, 8:34am by spaceballs_3000

Yes: if it were just the scientific case, without all these oddities, I would be less skeptical.

you might want to add the details of DWs revealing late-night phone call with B. Transcript here somewhere. It struck me at the time.

spaceballs_3000 wrote:

23. Richard S. Weir (not talking about DW) is also a co-founder of EEStor, but he seems to have left EEStor to start up his own internet marketing company ‘Opnix Inc.’

When did this happen? All I could find about this was Richard joining that companies advisory board in 2001.

MrLouMrLou wrote:

spaceballs_3000 wrote:

23. Richard S. Weir (not talking about DW) is also a co-founder of EEStor, but he seems to have left EEStor to start up his own internet marketing company ‘Opnix Inc.’

When did this happen? All I could find about this was Richard joining that companies advisory board in 2001.

They destroyed all their prototypes in "destructive testing - "the cat ate my prototype"

mw wrote:

They destroyed all their prototypes in "destructive testing - "the cat ate my prototype"

Why are you trying so hard to press these ridiculous claims?

[spaceballs_3000]Business oddities (and others) that make you go 'huh?'

You are kidding right? These arguments have all come thru here at one time or another and all have been reasonably answered :)

1. KP could fund whole project, why didn't they.
Why should they?

2. Mort Topfer could fund whole project, why didn't they.
Why should he?

3. Lightevs license, EEStor need money.
Says who?

4. Zenn license, EEStor needs money
Says who?

5. LM license, no money exchanged hands.
Is that actual fact or are you assuming?

6. EEStor company is not new, been around since ~2002.
That is right and you just noticed!

7. Zenn investing money into AEC (new power source), and AEC is now gone.
This one is interesting only against Zenn. Sorry can't defend it :)

8. Announcements like permittivity but at low voltage, i.e. no energy density can be calculated.
Pure Speculation.

9. DW says no new science, if EESU exists (permittivity+HV), it's new science.
I think you are arguing semantics here?

10. DW, says to public it works, but no proof to public.
Yah, and you just heard of them and they have been around since 2002.

11. Not one company (on public record) has said they’ve seen a prototype/sample (excluding EEStor.)
What record?

12. DW says it's easy to manufacture, though it's been many years now.
This is you trying really hard to say what???

13. DW says EESU will be safe, I've read up on patents, nothing to date in patents can back up this if component is cracked/crushed.
That's right! Of course they do not exist! Right?

14. Changing release dates, i.e. 2008, 2009.
Yes, from what I understand it was for better electronics integration at the prompting of LM.

15. Zenn PR goes to the effort of correcting people when they say Zenn has a prototype, but not on other significant wrong facts.
I think that is because they have not receive a EESU from the actual production line, which would technicaly be the first prototype from the line.

16. Zenn Says they visit EEStor frequently, yet they delay announcements like it's all new to them.
"Zenn" what can I say :)
17. Recent AGM, Zenn speaker acknowledges permittivity milestones is what *really* determines if EESU can exist or not. Since Zenn says they work closely with EEStor, one would think this would be determined a long time ago.
Time will tell.

18. IC says “… ZMC has always had internal and 3rd party subject matter experts who are knowledgeable…” Yet why did they invest in AEC then?
?

19. If EEStor patents did work, it would have been copied already by countries that don’t uphold patent law.
Who says they haven't?

20. IC said last year that it's "Imminent"
We all know what that means :)

21. KP is touting other battery technologies now.
Haven't they always?

22. DW is co-founder of Tulip Systems, the company is now is gone.
Yep, niche market vanished!

23. Richard S. Weir (not talking about DW) is also a co-founder of EEStor, but also works for a internet marketing company ‘Opnix Inc.’
Added from Zawy post below.

Don't know anything about this but I am sure you are just throwing any thing out there to see if it sticks. I am sure you have not done your due diligence on this :)

24. There's no physics theory that supports the idea of any material doing more than 2% of what they claim.
Yah science is so slow, it took all of evolution for Newton to show we had gravity, before that everything was a Wyle E. cartoon kind of existence :)~

25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis.
Neither have I! Have You?

26. They're too old to be doing anything so fantastically new, > 60 yr old.
So, you do not know anyone over 60 and in good physical and mental condition. How old are you?

27. The most intelligent experts in the field have the greatest skepticism "beyond fantasy".
Now you have to "define intelligence" and the "field" you speak of?

28. EEStor's most highly-valued agreement is with a photographer's company that has a dismal financial history of assembling pre-made parts for fancy golf carts.

I think what you are referring to is 1 of 3 known contracts and that you believe this one is any one more valuable then the rest is your opinion.

29. Billions of these capacitors are already made each years at 20 times the cost EEStor claims it can do. Even cost of pure BT does not jive with making $5,000 units.

So DW could use your excuse to raise his price anytime if he likes :) He must think just like you:)~

30. Past Weir and Nelson investors lost all their investment.

People loose on investments all the time, have you looked around? Besides the product was a success, just no buyers :(

31. None of their 17 or so patents have ever been used in a commercial product (that i know of).
Again no buyers and no reason.

32. There are no positive indications that EEStor will ever do what they claim.

Could you re submit a new list with out any of your own thoughts put in?

33. PET cannot withstand more than 0.5% of the voltage they want to apply.
What did you pull this out of?

From MW
34. EEStor destroyed all their prototypes in destructive testing

OK?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof :)

Extraordinary Comments should be proven :)~

Geofree wrote:

... Extraordinary Comments should be proven :)~

Skeptics have been arguing against for quite sometime now and have not touched upon the correct answer, because of permittivity and can not grasp how permittivity could be a non answer to DW.

So most here just type to see there own text more than argue specific's and go on and on.

There has been no real news for awhile and everyday I check in on this lovely little Soap Opera to see where the argument stands. Today I see it as Skeptic over the Top and and Agnostics sitting idle. So I thought I would ask for the skeptic to try some new hypothesis. These old ones are so boring 0-o

I like the fact you are finally arguing the Internal Barrier Layer. It would be nice if you could actually explain this to a laymen like I :)

So no I have nothing to add, just a request for some NEW NEWS :)

Geofree wrote:

... So I thought I would ask for the skeptic to try some new hypothesis. These old ones are so boring 0-o
... So no I have nothing to add, just a request for some NEW NEWS :)

duffeldorf III wrote:

Geofree wrote:

Why are you trying so hard to press these ridiculous claims?

Because they are orders of magnitude more transparent than DW's "rediculous claims"

Why is that? lol :)~ Which just sends you in to the tantrums. I know you do not have anything substantial to add to this :)~

most important of all: eetom, ypo, zawy, tec say it is bullshit impossibility, end of argument. sorry if i left your name out.

spaceballs,

Great post.

Ralph

Wow, Geofree -- we can't "prove" that there is no Easter Bunny either! It's the collection of evidence, logic and science that makes EEStor so unlikely to have the silver bullet you expect (and have been told to expect by Zenn).

It is the business plan of EEStor that makes absolutely no sense to me. If anybody at EEStor wanted to make any serious money, this is not the way they would go about it. Not if they could actually show that their ideas work.

I know that these points have been beaten to death. In a very old movie (Son of Paleface) Bob Hope listens to a stranger's opinion, then says: "I once met an old indian who believed that all the waters of the earth are held in the armpit of a giant frog. I respect him for his beliefs".

You may believe what you want and be willing to gamble with impossible odds, but how could you advise someone you liked to invest EESTor (Zenn) now?

New guy in Department of Energy, specializing in ferroelectric materials thinks EEStor is crap.

8. Announcements like permittivity but at low voltage, i.e. no energy density can be calculated.
Pure Speculation.

Whether or not they have tested at a high-voltage is speculation, but the fact is they have not announced a single 3rd party test at high voltage.

35. Reasonable people from independent businesses under NDAs are moving ahead with impossible invention.

All skepticism is equal but some is more equal than others.

ricinro wrote:

35. Reasonable people from independent businesses under NDAs are moving ahead with impossible invention.

All skepticism is equal but some is more equal than others.

Spaceballs - some of your points are now technical not business?

Geofree wrote:

3. Lightevs license, EEStor need money.
Says who?

DW said this in a revealing late night telephone conversation with B. He indicated that the deal was good because it allowed them to continue to make progres - without it they would not be able to do this.

Tom

ee-tom wrote:

Spaceballs - some of your points are now technical not business?

Geofree wrote:

3. Lightevs license, EEStor need money.
Says who?

DW said this in a revealing late night telephone conversation with B. He indicated that the deal was good because it allowed them to continue to make progres - without it they would not be able to do this.

Tom

I can't seem to find that telephone conversation with DW and B, can you show me where to find it?

Just gotta' save this post.
Priceless.

spaceballs_3000 wrote:

Business, and technological oddities that make you go 'huh?'

1. KP could fund whole project, why didn't they.
2. Mort Topfer could fund whole project, why didn't they.
3. Lightevs license, EEStor need money.
4. Zenn license, EEStor needs money
5. LM license, no money exchanged hands.
6. EEStor company is not new, been around since ~2002.
7. Zenn investing money into AEC (new power source), and AEC is now gone.
8. Announcements like permittivity but at low voltage, i.e. no energy density can be calculated.
9. DW says no new science, if EESU exists (permittivity+HV), it's new science.
10. DW, says to public it works, but no proof to public.
11. Not one company (on public record) has said they’ve seen a prototype/sample (excluding EEStor.)
12. DW says it's easy to manufacture, though it's been many years now.
13. DW says EESU will be safe, I've read up on patents, nothing to date in patents can back up this if component is cracked/crushed.
14. Changing release dates, i.e. 2008, 2009.
15. Zenn PR goes to the effort of correcting people when they say Zenn has a prototype, but not on other significant wrong facts.
16. Zenn Says they visit EEStor frequently, yet they delay announcements like it's all new to them.
17. Recent AGM, Zenn speaker acknowledges permittivity milestones is what *really* determines if EESU can exist or not. Since Zenn says they work closely with EEStor, one would think this would be determined a long time ago.
18. IC says “… ZMC has always had internal and 3rd party subject matter experts who are knowledgeable…” Yet why did they invest in AEC then?
19. If EEStor patents did work, it would have been copied already by countries that don’t uphold patent law.
20. IC said last year that it's "Imminent"
21. KP is touting other battery technologies now.
22. DW is co-founder of Tulip Systems, the company is now is gone.
23. Richard S. Weir (not talking about DW) is also a co-founder of EEStor, but also works for a internet marketing company ‘Opnix Inc.’
Added from Zawy post below.
24. There's no physics theory that supports the idea of any material doing more than 2% of what they claim.
25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis.
26. They're too old to be doing anything so fantastically new, > 60 yr old.
27. The most intelligent experts in the field have the greatest skepticism "beyond fantasy".
28. EEStor's most highly-valued agreement is with a photographer's company that has a dismal financial history of assembling pre-made parts for fancy golf carts.
29. Billions of these capacitors are already made each years at 20 times the cost EEStor claims it can do. Even cost of pure BT does not jive with making $5,000 units.
30. Past Weir and Nelson investors lost all their investment.
31. None of their 17 or so patents have ever been used in a commercial product (that i know of).
32. There are no positive indications that EEStor will ever do what they claim.
33. PET cannot withstand more than 0.5% of the voltage they want to apply.
From MW
34. EEStor destroyed all their prototypes in destructive testing

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof :)

Wow this looks like the list I made, to convince myself I was doing the right thing, not investing in Apple.

It was way longer and not as much speculation!! live and learn

Last edited Thu, 07 May 2009, 10:57am by Jay

The sure thing: If I sell all my ZENN stock today at a nice profit the EESU will appear as if by magic tomorrow.

Ron

Limiting my thoughts to the most discussed science related issues arised by skeptics, I remember that until few months ago(hope I remember well):
-someone were strongly refusing the possibility to keep high permittivity by coating BaTiO3 grains with low permittivity alumina;
-and also refused the possibility to get high permittivity over a wide temp range.

Today there is enough info to change skeptics' mind, turning them to say both points are indeed not impossible to achieve; now we are waiting to see if the third and last big wall(high permittivity over high E field) is actually unbreakable, or if some skeptics here were indeed again wrong for the third time.

"25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis."

Thomas Edison was home schooled and I can't seem to find any published papers by him. He must have been a fraud! I bet GE doesn't have what they say they have either.

e'er wrote:

"25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis."

Thomas Edison was home schooled and I can't seem to find any published papers by him. He must have been a fraud! I bet GE doesn't have what they say they have either.

spaceballs_3000 wrote:

e'er wrote:

"25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis."

Thomas Edison was home schooled and I can't seem to find any published papers by him. He must have been a fraud! I bet GE doesn't have what they say they have either.

At least Thomas Edison had working samples (publicly demoed,) at that point published papers are secondary.

Thomas Edison didn't live in a money infested cesspool era and competition didn't exist either!

Galileo Galilei invented the telescope but when he demoed it... he almost got fired by Inquisition !

spaceballs_3000 wrote:

e'er wrote:

"25. Weir and Nelson have never published anything, not even a thesis."

Thomas Edison was home schooled and I can't seem to find any published papers by him. He must have been a fraud! I bet GE doesn't have what they say they have either.

At least Thomas Edison had working samples (publicly demoed,) at that point published papers are secondary.

At least? I wasn't addressing the "working samples" complaint. I was addressing the published papers one. My only point is that your "published papers" complaint is weak. I actually consider many of your others strong, but not this one.

e'er wrote:

...
At least? I wasn't addressing the "working samples" complaint. I was addressing the published papers one. My only point is that your "published papers" complaint is weak. I actually consider many of your others strong, but not this one.