Posts by we_cat_global

Hi All,

How do you guys think Thomas Darden, JT Vaughn, Dewey Weaver and all the other clowns from Raleigh feel about Rossi’s latest statements?

Cheers,

JB

Quote from JedRothwell

Oh yes I can!

Hi JedRothwell,

Yup. Nice way of showing it. I dare you..You won’t last a month.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from sam12

There are now four threads related to DR Rossi on Lenr Forum.

Quite an achievment considering they are thinking of having no discusion here about Rossi

and his technology.

Hi sam12,

Haha..indeed. The moderators of this beautiful forum are experiencing the might of the Rossi-effect. Nice!

Cheers,

JB

Hi Walter Pegeto,

Wrong thread, buddy.

For people in the “Rossi Twilight Zone” (“it must all be BS, but quite a few hints exist that there is more than meets the eye”) we have the “Clearance” section.

Here we celebrate the possibility of a dawn of a new era.

Cheers,

JB

Hi SERGEI,

Thank you for opening this thread. Let's see what dipstick posts the first sour, cynic remarks.

Andrea Rossi is a very remarkable man. Whatever way you spin his statements. I am looking forward to an interesting few months!

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Dr Richard

Maybe Rossi decided to crank up the BS because his precious thread here was threatened with closure? A final desperate act to attract as much attention as possible?

Hi Dr Richard,

It's just not very plausible is it?

Il Dottore has always delivered. And chances that he has what he says that he has are increasing with every iteration, every statement. The several presentations, the different E-Cat models, the different groups he convinced, etc. Chances that this is the "Final Rossi Chapter" are slim. Very slim. Chances that we will see a test or some sort of presentation are increasing.

Perhaps start thinking out the strategy on how to debunk a test of a standalone E-Cat? Power the thing by an invisible laser? Microwave?

All the best to you, Sir,

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Alan Smith

AR has built a robotic production line for comments.

Hi Alan Smith,

..and you helped him. Massively.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Walter Pegeto

You need a researchgate account.

The names and profiles of the researchers who recommend a paper are public.

You can even contact them and ask questions.

Hi Walter Pegeto,

But are you sure Rossi did not create 200+ fake accounts and from his condo in Miami is answering all these questions in Rossi English?

Cheers,

JB

Hi Walter Pegeto,

Hallelujah! Don't convert too fast!

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Walter Pegeto

After a due investigation seems that Rossi paper 240 recommendations and 33500 reads on researchgate are not fake accounts as Fred suspected.

How such a rather speculative (to be kind), poorly written, paper received so much attention is beyond my head.

Hi Walter Pegeto,

..and perhaps he will present his world changing invention soon?

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Shane D.

So far the feedback seems like a wash, and if that does not change then we will definitely move forward sans Rossi.

Hi Shane D.,

Show to the community that you have a pair! No more Rossi. Make this beautiful forum finally believable. It would save you guys some time as well. All the BS posts on Rossi's BS science. What are you waiting for? You guys should have done this eight years ago. Sans rancune.

However, only do it if you guys ban the topic for good. No backtracking, No half-baked measures. Rossi. Gone. For. Good.

Own it.

Cheers,

JB

Hi Alan Smith,

I am all for it.

However, you probably create an "elephant in the room" situation. Rossi is (still) a cult figure. For many a villain, for some a hero. Debunking (or defending) his technology has little sense, because there is nothing concrete to debunk or defend. There is always room for the opposite party to form a counter argument. And that is why the conversations get dragged-out so long and get so tiresome.

Still, the above is what cult figures typically bring into existence. You love 'm or you hate 'm and that process creates buzz. And that buzz always adds more to a topic than the critics dare to admit. Eddy the Eagle is a good example. So is Vinnie Jones. Aileen Wuornos? And sometimes cult figures turn out to be brilliant and change the world.

So in that sense, if you really care about LENR you should not ban the topic Rossi from the forum. That move discloses bias and perhaps means shooting yourselves in the foot...The Italian Jesus is still on a mission to save the world and only until he isn't you cannot be sure that he does not succeed.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from interested observer

Rossi will never throw in the towel. Why should he? He doesn’t actually have to do anything but post drivel on his blog and people like you eat it up like candy. And the Italian Jesus? You really need help.

Hi interested observer,

Jesus threw in the towel when he died. But don't criticise me for being gay when Rossi rises again. And we all need help now and then. That's what friends are for. Thank you for being around.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from Director

I wonder how many groups behind the scenes are replicating systems utilizing the negative resistance regime of a plasma discharge to produce a complex space charge configuration with double layers to produce excess energy? My guess is that there are several. If there's anyone lurking on this forum that is doing research, please share information about your research on this thread.

Hi @Director,

I think there are quite a few as well. The increase in PR and claims is proof of that in my opinion. Parties are rushing to be the first. The person that will win the public’s trust first will be the name remembered.

Cheers,

JB

PS: Many thanks for your clear and thoughtful posts. I read them with great pleasure.

Quote from interested observer

One thing we can count on is that when absolutely nothing comes of whatever Rossi’s latest teaser is supposed to be, his intrepid band of hopeless admirers will take it in stride and patiently await the next great breakthrough.

Hi interested observer,

Sure thing! And i will let you have your monent of glory when the Italian Jesus throws in the towel.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from orsova

Link Fund Solutions made the decision to increase the valuation. They did not do so arbitrarily or without cause. Industrial Heat raised a new round of funding at a higher valuation.

Hi orsova,

Exactly.

And if you would be so kind to check how big that next round was you would be of great help. I suspect it was a relative small round. Fluffing illiquid holdings is easy. Moreover, Link did not turn out to be very good at their job, now did they?

Cheers,

JB

Quote from THHuxleynew

JB says:

Woodford screwed up and made too many wrong bets. That was his biggest problem. Secondly, his investment structure was sub-optimal leading to imbalances between listed and unlisted stocks once investors started redeeming.(fluff deleted)

So you are now agreeing with me. There is no way that inflating the IH SP would help Woodford, and in fact because of the regulatory issues it actually harms him.

Glad we are now on the same page with this, my work is done!

Hi THHuxleynew,

Sure! Spin it baby..if you think we agree you are half way there.

Cheers,

JB

Quote from THHuxleynew

JB said:

Hi THHuxleynew ,

This is perhaps the dumbest post from your hand. “Cobbler, stick to your last”?

JB:

You said IH nominal (it is illiquid) Share Price of IH going up helps Woodford funds

I said it makes his problems worse.

Since the holding (like his various other VC holdings) cannot simply be sold the book SP is a bit fictional but any further equity sold in IH pushes up the book price of the company and hence the existing shares.

Normally, in any fund, that would be a welcome NAV increase although a bit fictional since the gain cannot be realised.

However Woodford's problem with his Equity Income fund is that that was supposed to be low risk and was not allowed more than a small amount invested in unquoted stock. Woodford's main problem was underperformance of his quoted holdings (most of the fund) which caused loss of confidence and many people to withdraw from his fund. That resulted in a sale of quoted holdings and therefore increased the fraction of unquoted stock he held beyond that permissable.

But, of course, any revaluation of those unquoted holdings upwards would make this happen quicker. If the increase in SP was real - with easy buyers, there would still be no problem: he could sell part of the unquoted holding. But finding buyers for IH, or his other unquoted holdings, is difficult.

My comments about your analysis stands. I don't think you do it on purpose, just some combination of bad information and bad judgement.

Display More

Hi THHuxleynew,

You better stop now, Buddy. Else people start to doubt other posts / opinions from your hand as well. It makes me smile to realise that you are so stubborn. Even when you position yourself on the slippery slope of finance. An area you are not very familiar with, it seems.

"Nominal" has nothing to do with illiquid or liquid. You think you know the subject, but the essence eludes you.

"Since the holding (like his various other VC holdings) cannot simply be sold the book SP is a bit fictional but any further equity sold in IH pushes up the book price of the company and hence the existing shares."

The above sentence is incomprehensible. But let's leave it at that. What is more important is that you are not able to distinguish head from side issues. Woodford screwed up and made too many wrong bets. That was his biggest problem. Secondly, his investment structure was sub-optimal leading to imbalances between listed and unlisted stocks once investors started redeeming.

I am not sure that Woodford did not use IH to artificially inflate NAV to dampen losses elsewhere. It would make sense for a fund manager to create such a mechanism, especially once the weak spots by the design of the fund become a threat. Investors, especially the retail investors present in the Woodford funds, are prone to sell at bad press and buy at good press. If you off-set the losses in the listed holdings with (inflated) profits in the unlisted holdings, one creates a different problem, but one that buys you time and is much easier to deal with than an avalanche of redeeming investors and the need to sell more listed holdings.

Cheers,

JB

PS: I doubt that the FSA has the expertise and / or resources to investigate the afore mentioned thesis, but i would find it interesting to investigate. Would it be possible that Thomas Darden and Neil Woodford made a shady deal? Could it be that the case with Rossi was closed because there was a chance of leakage and Woodford shut it down? Stuff for movies, dear friends. Game on!

Quote from Walter Pegeto

Have you considered that all this excessive attention to Rossi paper is free advertising for Rossi ?

Hi Walter Pegeto,

So what?

Have you ever considered that your continuous dumb posts will eventually lead to a big dent in self confidence?

Cheers,

JB

Quote from THHuxleynew

Wrong.

Inflating the IH equity price actually makes Woodford's problems WORSE - it increases the percentage of illiquid assets and it was a regulatory limit on that being breached that forced the fund to close.

Maybe your analysis of IH is as accurate as your analysis of Woodford funds?

Hi THHuxleynew,

This is perhaps the dumbest post from your hand. “Cobbler, stick to your last”?

Cheers,

JB