Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In short, I think I would be betting on the Li ion batteries. ;)
In short, I think you will be loosing that bet <g>.
I hope your loss is not as great as Sony's recent $ 175 million
quarterly loss on an older lithium technology, soon to push half a
billion net(adding new meaning to the "Japanese bath")...
but just the same -
In the tradition of Bond and the new Casino Royale, here is my "tell."
You'll have to see the flick if you are not into to Poker terminology.
But the chase-scene, atop a crane, is worth the ticket price, even the
$12 ripoff tiks in SF. Never mind that they probably never heard of
"Texas Holdem" in Montenegro, but hey this is 007, who has dodged almost
as many bullets as the Governor of California.
Anyway, here is my "tell" and "no-charge" <g> I base my optimism in
EEStor not in the published patent, which may have been modified in
unpublished additions a dozen times by now - nor on the 'ancient
history' found in older EE textbooks and charts made before the advent
of nanotech and excitonics, but as mentioned in the initial posting, on
the presence of a single player at the table - the proverbial 800 pound
gorilla - and the telling advice is this: NEVER bet against
Kleiner-Perkins.
http://www.kpcb.com/portfolio/
They are the VC funder behind EEStor ... and they have an almost
flawless track record of wins based on the "super-size-it" version of
"due diligence" ... and the proof is found on the bottom line: they
consistently make more money for their clients than the GDP of most
countries.
Jones
