Woofford fund: Mitchell Fraser-Jones answers about industrial Heat investment

There are no promising LENR technologies other than the Energy Catalyzer.

Quote

The company is indeed engaged in a legal dispute regarding the ownership of some of its intellectual property but it is not uncommon for early-stage businesses to be caught up in such disputes.

No it isn't. What's uncommon is for a giant fund, with virtually unlimited resources, not to require a definitive test of the presumed technology before investing/committing hundreds of millions of dollars. That's pretty unusual. And you don't take the word of the inventor's "experts" for it!

Quote

More importantly, the claims relate to just one part of Industrial Heat’s technology suite. The company has built up a very interesting portfolio of promising cold fusion technologies that are currently undergoing in-house testing, followed by external validation.

Cart before the horse. First you validate INDEPENDENTLY of the inventors, THEN you invest. Perhaps these wealthy executives of billion dollar funds should watch the TV program "Shark Tank". If they ever proposed support for a lame nut case imbecile like Rossi, or an unlikely and untested set of grandiose claims like Brillouin's "boilers", they would be laughed off the studio floor. "Promising cold fusion technologies"? Like Rossi and Defkalion were "promising"?

I suspect before this fiasco of IH and Woodford is over, the two funds will lose a lot of investors' money. After all, if they are so sloppy with their energy investments, how careful can they be with the rest?

Apparently, at least some of their health care investments don't work any better than Rossi's ecats. See the discussion of Circassia in the comments section:

https://woodfordfunds.com/insi…esults-2016/#comment-9088

Quote from MrSelfSustain

There are no promising LENR technologies other than the Energy Catalyzer.

If this were true, then there would be no promising LENR technologies, because the evidence is reasonably strong that the E-Cat doesn't work.

Consider this circumstantial argument: By February, 2015, HI was making devices that were incorporated in the Doral Plant. From the Rossi email selling that move, to make the plant cost $200,000. It was then able to make power worth $30,000 per month. What would operating costs be? Let's set them at $10,000 per month, assuming central monitoring of multiple installations, with remote fail-safe shutdown in place. That's $20,000 per month margin, payback in less than a year.

Rossi could have contracted with IH to make plants for, say, $240,000, taking full responsibility. He had the money to invest. Those plants could have been installed in, say, Sweden for central heating. He could also have simply made the plants in Sweden. The design was known and easily reproducible by him.

For usage outside the IH territory, this would have been fully allowed. And if the technology works, he'd have been making money hand over fist. And would have many installations to show new customers and possible investors.

Instead, he focused on this phony Guaranteed Performance Test. Did he get legal advice? Johnson is a lawyer. What in the world did Johnson tell him, or was Johnson just a yes-man?

My basic conclusion is that Rossi is not sane. This does not tell us if he has or does not have a real effect he is working from. However, it means that nothing can be trusted without independent verification, which everyone involved with the field was looking for, since before 2011.

I know, based on a strong preponderance of the evidence, with multiple independent confirmations, that LENR Is real. However, I also have seen no confirmed evidence that it is ready for commercialization.

The technology is "promising," unless by "promising" one means, "ready to make buckets of money with." For a long time, and I don't know how long, LENR research will spend money, not make it. Some people may make money selling tools or services to support research, but that's small.

At this point, investors must have a long-term vision, knowing that the long-term is also risky. The long-term vision might include spending to get their feet wet, to become familiar with the field. I'm suggesting spending that will create knowledge, even if that knowledge is that "This approach doesn't work," and hopefully why it doesn't work! Another form of spending that is immediately useful is supporting research that will flip the mainstream view of LENR, which will benefit all, and especially investors, by steering public money toward LENR research.

Quote from Mats002

Yes, Woodford is the only public way into this market I know of.

It may be possible for a specific LENR investment fund to offer shares to the public, and buy into IH Holdings International, Ltd., as did Woodford, apparently with two of their funds.

IHHI is not going to solicit public investiment directly, for very obvious reasons. Obviously, IHHI would have to consent to that purchase, but a public fund could collect funds for that purpose. I would be suspicious of any such fund at this point that has a high overhead. While such a fund could make direct investments in research or commercial operations, my suspicion is that cooperation with IHHI would be much more powerful. So far, they actually demonstrated with Rossi just how patient they would be, and that could be a reassurance to researchers that IH isn't going to start pushing them around. They never did push Rossi around.