Former French President Pompidou who died in 1973 said: "There are three ways to ruin yourself ; women, gambling and research. The most enjoyable is with women, the fastest is with gambling, but the safest is with research."
Spotted by J-P Biberian
I empathize. I spent all my money on top shelf booze, fast cars, and loose women. The rest I wasted.
Kevmo,
In reading your posts I am starting to get the impression your IH/Rossi/ERV/$10 million/IP transfer/Doral/$89 million timeline is off. Just to make sure we are all on the same page; the $10 mil was paid, and IP transfered in June 2013, after the *first* ERV (Penon) Report showed the Validation Test was successfully completed. That all took place in Italy.
In Feb 2015 (19 months later), the Doral test/commercial heat sale began. It ended 1 year later in Feb 2016. A month later the *second* ERV (Penon) Report was made public, and showed the 1 year test was successful. The next month, Rossi initiated his lawsuit against IH for non-payment of the final $89 mil.
Hope that helps.
NASA got the wrong fuel? I don't think so
Apolgies Jed. You are quite right, it was Childress at Boeing who got 'the wrong fuel'. I mis-remebered.
Display MoreOk. Let’s say you learn about an exciting new can opener. Rumours are that it works great. So great that all other can openers will soon be obsolete.
By some luck, you are able to purchase a licence from the can opener inventor, so you can manufacture these new can openers. It requires that the can opener be demonstrated on several types of can, so ensure that it is good as it seems. Sure enough, the inventor opens the cans incredibly, even if a large number of cans were not even attempted to be opened during the test to Validate the can opener.
You sign a contract for a semi-exclusive license to the can opener, and pay $10 million for this.
It is possible that the inventor has already the final embodiment for the ready-for-market can opener version. Certified, ergonomic, just plug and play. For this ultimate market-ready version an additional $89 million will be paid. It has to be tested in a real restaurant for a year, so be sure that it is indeed market ready.
Back at your facility, you make a few can openers based on the can opener IP you have purchased. They shred the can tops, leave metal chunks in the cans, and don’t stay on the can tops long enough to open a can. The independently constructed can opener is so poor that it is easier to pound the lid of a can off with the can opener than cut the lid off as the design intends. You call the inventor, and ask for help. Whenever you aren’t looking, the inventor gets the can opener to work, but when you watch, the can opener fails even for the inventor. You make a bunch of sealed can openers for testing. As a blank, a sheet of paper is installed into some of the sealed can opener assemblies instead of a can opener. The inventor not only gets these sealed can openers to open cans beautifully, but the sheet of paper units also miraculously open cans.
In the meantime the inventor says he has found a restaurant that can be used for the ultimate can opener test. He wants to show that the ultimate can opener can function in a real restaurant with a real need of ultimate can openers. The problems with the other can openers made under licence can be dealt with later. The restaurant cannot wait. There must be quick action, so as to not lose the opportunity. The restaurant will surely install some other make of can opener if they do not act fast. The restaurant is associated with a giant kitchen gadget manufacturer, and will undoubtedly raise the profile of these can openers once they go public with the use of these thrilling new can openers.
Immediately problems start cropping up. The can opener installed at the restaurant is greatly modified from the ultimate can opener version intended to be tested. The wiring is weird. The blades don’t seem to make sense, etc. The restaurant itself seems nothing like the restaurants associated with the giant kitchen gadget manufacturer. Nobody seems to eat there. No food goes in, and no food packaging ever comes out. The restaurant customers are hidden behind a wall. Nobody can ask them how was their meal, did they find metal bits in their food, were the chefs swearing about can openers or not.
And still the can openers made at your facility will not open cans. Reports come in that the restaurant is opening many thousands of cans a day. More cans are reported being opened in the restaurant than can be explained by the number of customers, the amount of space to hold the cans, or the lack of empty cans and lids being shipped out.
.....
Interesting and fun analogy. To bring it up to speed, you need to have the name of the company interested in the whizbang can opener , it should be Industrial Can Openers , Inc. There's a certain level of assumption in the name that IC should be able to assess some new whizbang IC technology.
So, why did IC put up with all that nonsense? And why did they pay $10M for fake dinosaur egg Can OPener IP? And why did they ask for more of that worthless Canopener IP when they countersued the whizbang mercurial "inventor"?
I am starting to get the impression your IH/Rossi/ERV/$10 million/IP transfer/Doral/$89 million timeline is off. Just to make sure we are all on the same page the $10 mil was paid, and IP transfered in June 2013, after the *first* ERV (Penon) Report showed the Validation Test was successfully completed. That all took place in Italy.
***Was there some kind of public announcement of the $10Mil validation at the time? It would have been an inductive touchpoint and I think I missed it, having been almost ignoring Rossi according to his own In Mercato Veritas approach.
In Feb 2015 (19 months later), the Doral test/commercial heat sale began. It ended 1 year later in Feb 2016.
***During this test, IH told Jed that the device did not work. I'm wondering when that happened. When did the two parties experience a falling out?
A month later the *second* ERV (Penon) Report was made public showed the 1 year test was successful.
***Presumably the INvalidation of the Validation Report is aimed at the 2nd test? Or is it aimed at both tests? The INvalidation report was by Murray and entered into the court case docket.
The next month, Rossi initiated his lawsuit against IH for non-payment of the final $89 mil.
***IH countersued asking for his IP. Did they or did they not obtain transfer of the IP after it was Validated according to that first report?: They obviously paid for it. What IP was IH countersuing for?
Hope that helps.
***It's good to get the timeline & record straight.
***Was there some kind of public announcement of the $10Mil validation at the time? It would have been an inductive touchpoint and I think I missed it, having been almost ignoring Rossi according to his own In Mercato Veritas approach.
No, the first we started learning of these things, was when the lawsuit was filed and documents made public.
***Presumably the INvalidation of the Validation Report is aimed at the 2nd test? Or is it aimed at both tests? The INvalidation report was by Murray and entered into the court case docket.
I think you are conflating two reports that were 2 1/2 years apart, and had nothing to do with each other.
The "Validation Test" (VT) took place on Apr 30 2013. It was an acceptance test. If Penon deemed it successful, and after the hand over of the IP, IH would release the $10 mil from escrow. It was "successful" (controversial though), the IP turned over, and the money was transferred in June 2013.
Murray wrote a report *after* the 1 year test ended in Feb 2016. That is over 2 1/2 years *after* the VT, and as I said...had nothing to do with the VT. Murray wrote that report to refute Penon's ERV Report, which concluded the 1 year test (Guaranteed Performance Test) that took place in Doral was successful.
***IH countersued asking for his IP. Did they or did they not obtain transfer of the IP after it was Validated according to that first report?: They obviously paid for it. What IP was IH countersuing for?
I do not remember if IH ever countersued for the IP...Anyone remember? They did not need to do that as I recall, because they pretty much owned it (IP) already. They did countersue however, and accused him of violating Florida fraud laws, or something like that.
The "Validation Test" (VT) took place on Apr 30 2013. It was an acceptance test. If Penon deemed it successful, and after the hand over of the IP, IH would release the $10 mil from escrow. It was "successful" (controversial though), the IP turned over, and the money was transferred in June 2013.
Murray wrote a report *after* the 1 year test ended in Feb 2016. That is over 2 1/2 years *after* the VT, and as I said...had nothing to do with the VT. Murray wrote that report to refute Penon's ERV Report, which concluded the 1 year test (Guaranteed Performance Test) that took place in Doral was successful.
So the original Validation report has never been challenged?
So the original Validation report has never been challenged?
Yes they did challenge, but only after Rossi filed his lawsuit 2 1/2 years later. And they did not contest on technical grounds, but on being lied to by Rossi about his reason for wanting to reduce the number of Ecats used for the VT.
“It is what one billionaire did“
Surreptitious Dick Smith Mention #2 there Mary... Logged.
Yes they did, but only after Rossi filed his lawsuit 2 1/2 years later. And they did not contest on technical grounds, but on being lied to by Rossi about his reason for wanting to reduce the number of Ecats used for the VT.
As an inductive touchpoint, that would make Rossi's IP uncontested on technical grounds, at least the first Validation for which $10M was paid. Trying to get the dinosaur Earth Mover to work without Fred Flintstone at the controls, well that's a completely different matter and is not addressed in that contract.
As an inductive touchpoint, that would make Rossi's IP uncontested on technical grounds, at least the first Validation for which $10M was paid. Trying to get the dinosaur Earth Mover to work without Fred Flintstone at the controls, well that's a completely different matter and is not addressed in that contract.
Actually, there is an anti-Flintstone at the controls clause:
.
Actually, there is an anti-Flintstone at the controls clause:
.
Nice Catch. It says that both sides "currently contemplate" that Rossi will be CTO but it didn't obligate IH in that vein. There appears to have been a major falling out between Rossi and IH. I think it was soon after the $10M was paid. If Rossi was scamming them, why not take off at that time? Perhaps he thought he could scam them for more money? If the gig is up and he's found out as a scam artist, there's no more reason for him to spend money on lawyers, and also there's no reason for IH to be asking for his IP in the countersuit.
Nice Catch. It says that both sides "currently contemplate" that Rossi will be CTO but it didn't obligate IH in that vein. There appears to have been a major falling out between Rossi and IH. I think it was soon after the $10M was paid. If Rossi was scamming them, why not take off at that time? Perhaps he thought he could scam them for more money? If the gig is up and he's found out as a scam artist, there's no more reason for him to spend money on lawyers, and also there's no reason for IH to be asking for his IP in the countersuit.
Recall that Rossi was bragging that he was Chief Scientist with his major industrial partner way back in 2013. One of his activities was evaluating competitor's patents.
I'll pop a quote in below once Rossilivecat/all finishes loading.
Dr Rossi: Wouldn’t the roll out of the E-Cat be faster and more effective if IH would have many more partners in all areas of product introduction? Thank you again for your time.
Bernie Koppenhofer:
I am not involved in commercial issues, being in a position of Chief Scientist with IH.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Anonymous:
I too hope you are well.
A- the third party test is going on. There will be no updates until the publication of the report.
B- my position of chief scientist of Industrial Heat does not involve me in commercial issues. I know strong activity is in course for what concerns the industrialization.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
With Industrial Heat we are making an important work of R&D, validation and industrialization. We are a strong team. The impact of the partnership has been and is extremely productive. About the results, I prefer to wait the results of the R&D and validation work in course. In Industrial Heat I am the chief scientist and as such I can talk about the results only after the validation in course will have been consolidated, based upon long term rigorous measurements.
The results could be positive, as we have reason to hope, but also negative. We have still a lot of work to do, and we are making a lot of work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mike Phalen:
We already have licensed our technology to our USA Partner. If they can be interested or not, in future, to sell sub licenses is not my task to understand. I am the chief scientist and have not commercial duties.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
In your new organization, do you hold a position in a decision-making body — such as a board of directors — or are you now simply an employee of the organization?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Frank Acland:
I am the chief scientist.
Warm Regards
A.R.
etc...
Recall that Rossi was bragging that he was Chief Scientist with his major industrial partner way back in 2013.
Maybe they had a falling out over that line of responsibility.
[Recall that Rossi was bragging that he was Chief Scientist with his major industrial partner way back in 2013.]
Maybe they had a falling out over that line of responsibility.
His major industrial partner turned out to be himself, in a pretend company. So, you are saying he had a falling out with himself. Interesting!
Maybe they had a falling out over that line of responsibility.
This is the last one I could find.
Caroline Collini:
As the chief scientist of the Team, I am not the right guy to receive that kind of questions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
And the first I can find:
Dear Koen Vandewalle:
Thank you.
I remain in the position of Chief Scientist.
Of course with the Partner we will increase the spin.
The report of the test just made will be important.
The informatic is important too.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
His major industrial partner turned out to be himself, in a pretend company. So, you are saying he had a falling out with himself. Interesting!
His major partner was IH. His major customer was Johnson Mathey, who it would appear was himself. But at any rate, I didn't say it, I was quoting someone else.
Reminds me of a post that you put up once about Rossi (at least I think it was you). Rossi was under indictment in Italy for defrauding his investors. It was proven that there were no other investors, just himself. So he was literally under indictment for defrauding himself. How's that there Italian Justice System, eh? Real effective against the Mafia.
Bruce__H. Any chance you could post your comments about the poisson statistical analysis and the graphs on ECW as well?
Done. It may take up to 24 hours to appear.
