blaze spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: Man, what does it say for Defkalion when everyone on Vortex is a doubter...
It says they should have done a better job on the demo. They should have planned it, and rehearsed. It was kind of amateur. I find it hard to believe they have been selling this to customers and investors. With *that*demo?! I say: it was impressive assuming it showed what it seemed to show. It was a good start. That's damning with faint praise! But here is the thing. They can try again. They get a do-over. They can correct mistakes and learn to do a better demo next time. Rossi is strong willed and he makes many mistakes, but when he finally let Levi et al. do a good test I thought he must have learned his lesson. Let us give him credit for that. Sure, I would prefer an independent replication in another lab, but this was a big improvement. A step in the right direction. Defkalion can also improve. UNLESS, they are dishonest. I can't rule that out. I can't judge. I do know they don't pay their bills on time, which is not a good sign. Alan Fletcher wrote: > I don't even follow their business model >> >> 1. Sell franchises in different countries ($40M each?) for products >> neither Defkalion nor the Franchise even develop[s]? >> (The same price for a big and a small country? Their original plan was >> to sell franchises for an "N-unit" factory, and thus sell multiple licenses >> to a "big" country). >> > It makes no sense to me, either. I get a sense they are floundering around, trying out one plan after another. The plans seem too complicated to me. My plan would be something like this: develop the gadget; patent as many aspects of it as you can, as quickly as you can; license the patents. Companies that pay for license early get a bargain price. After that, the price starts to go up. - Jed
