I wrote:
> I told them I disagree, but I added that it is their business and their > decision, so I have no objection. > I mean that. I am sincere. I have enough experience in business to know that you don't go around telling other people how to run their business. You have to know about the situation in detail before you can judge what is the best interests of a company. It is my impression, judging from what little I know, that it would be in their best interest to establish credibility, the way Rossi did with the recent Levi study. That is my impression, but without detailed knowledge of their IP, their contracts, business deals, ongoing negotiations and so on, I cannot judge. I know nothing about Defkalion's business, and I do not want to know. I learned long ago to keep my nose out of other people's business. Unless I am paid to know, in which case I say NOTHING. I have also learned that you cannot tell whether a company is legitimate or not without detailed information. Or whether it might be a good investment prospect. That is why I never, ever, tell anyone they should or should not invest in a company. People have asked me from time to time. Not specifically about Defkalion. My answer is always the same: You need to spend a week or two reviewing financial data, business plans, and asking dozens of questions. I would not hazard a guess except in a casual conversation. I have said here, for example, that I personally would not get involved in a business arrangement with Rossi, because he is . . . mercurial. Unpredictable. That's just my impression. I would never make a formal recommendation one way or the other. I have no idea what IP he holds or what he might offer to an investor. I can offer serious opinions about the technical merits of some claims, especially regarding calorimetry. That's my limit. I can describe in some detail why I think the recent Levi paper boosts Rossi's credibility. I can say why Mizuno's recent claims would be improved with more data from the T5 sensor at the cell wall. - Jed
