Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Fact Checking

I've been doing some fact checking on some new EEStor information I have.  Stay tuned


Manthan said...

Seriously? Like you said you had big news couple of days ago. Why has EEStor not released third party results?

Seriously if EEStor is a scam, you will have hurt a good company (ZENN).

It just seems too good to be true. And if it is true why has their been no third party testing? or results of third party testing?

Just doesn't make sense to be soo secretive.

mrjerry said...

Here is a great article of Zenn and Engineering EV and EEstor, A MUST READ"

The VP Bergeron is not so optimistic on eestor as been reported as of april 2008

We visit [EEStor] regularly, and we remain optimistic. They’re moving forward. Obviously we had hoped they’d be farther along than they are, but the approach that’s being taken is favourable to coming up quickly in production.

“Obviously we have a position with EEStor that’s very favourable to us, but we’re engineers,” he adds. “We have to look at all technologies and keep abreast of all technologies just to stay on top of things.”

richterm said...

Thanks at least for the update on what you're doing. I do appreciate fact checking efforts if that's what's going on. I think everyone is a bit edgy standing on this cliff, and anything that makes Zeen seem like a pump-and-dump flares tempers.

richterm said...

Reading the article it doesn't sound like Bergeron is not optimistic - just a bit antsy. I actually appreciate it compared to Clifford's rose colored glasses. If Zenn was trying to hide something I think all the execs would be singing the same song.

mrjerry said...

Found this Job opening for Zenn test Engineer

Reporting to the VP of Engineering, the
Test Engineer will support the validation of current and future ZENN fully electric motor vehicles. The Test Engineer will validate engineering designs both at the component and vehicle level in order to ensure conformance to:

- Federal and State / Provincial Regulations

- Product requirements

- Engineering specifications.

stampergl said...

One of the things which strikes me as odd is nobody has discussed the idea of regeneratice braking in conjunction with an ESU. In typical hybrids, only a small percentage of expended energy is recaprured due to the slowness of a chemical battery. I would think an ESU would be able to recapture a very high percentage. Has anybody seen any postings on this??

CautiouslyOptimistic said...

"Stay tuned"?

"I hate to be a tease"?

B - I'm trying to understand your motivation for this blog generally, and these statements specifically. I think perhaps you love to be a tease.

b said...

hey CO,

i'm not a reporter but rather a blogger. i track this topic because it's interesting to me and seems like it has the potential for global importance. not trying to be a tease though. i do have some info which i wanted to gain a better understanding of due to some new complementary info i have. some of it is speculative both on the part of my sources and my own organization of it. so i could put it all together really poorly or back up a little bit and try to get it right. i cant guarantee i will unfortunately. but thats whats behind the delay. if i learned some simple to understand piece of info that's difficult to get wrong, I'd just throw it up asap. but ive got to navigate through a couple opinions on things and figure out which is right by digging a little deeper.

in the end, i think i may be able to add a couple more pieces to the puzzle....making a bit more sense of existing publicly available information.

Manthan said...

why wouldn't you put the whole story when your done instead of doing a tease?

your just not a very good blogger

mrjerry said...

stampergl, I have also thought about the regeneration of breaking, I understand that from my reads that it will be about 60% at first, but could be improved to 90% in time. The faster you have to stop, it might not be able to be converted to all energy and brake pads are needed for this purpose, but in theory only loss would be in the cables and friction of the motor.

marcus said...

"your just not a very good blogger"

Well he/she has at least provided some new info and at the very least this is a good forum for everyone to contribute to. For instance mrjerry has certainly proved a good source of info! Yes, it may be an idea to post stories without pre-warnings but that is a minor concern in my view.

b said...

mantham, you're right. thanks.

Alex said...

I agree with manthan. It does seems a little suspicious how these "3rd party" permittivity test results are still, as yet, unknown. How long does it take to look at a product and see if it really works? I fear ZENN will be destroyed by EEStor.

Manthan said...

I think what mrjerry has said is good and all but i have never heard of a blogger or anyone who wants to give out news first saying, i have important information but i dont want to tell you cause im not sure.

I would rather just have the info when he is done looking into it, instead of beating around the bush. but w/e its your blog and if you like to annoy people by all means do it.

wicker said...

mrjerry said...

Putting some pieces together"
In the inteview link i posted today

So, while Bergeron can’t answer the question of when ZENN will begin receiving EESUs, he says, “We visit [EEStor] regularly, and we remain optimistic. They’re moving forward.

Blogger interview with Richard Weir
Blogger: What about the permitivity testing? Is it going to happen?

Richard Weir: Everything here is quite going along exceptionally well. We're very happy with things. And things are going exceptionally well

First of all from my reading, Bergeron is a straight shooter, he will tell you the way it is, right after eestor announcement of Barium titanate purity and delivery 15k by year end of 2007 Bergeron press release sounded well as we know now, like there a long way from delivering a product (now we are 18 month later and still waiting for the permittivity testing) never mind a product. Bergeron said Jan 2007

"We have the expertise and capability
to integrate EEStor technology into our existing and future vehicles should the EEStor batteries become available” says Mike Bergeron, VP of Engineering for ZENN Motor Company."

Based on these two comments from weirs and Bergeron, it sounds like they are not there, promising scallable and worth continuing, zenn got enough money to go another year, and since the stock price has no affect on them, this horse is not going down the stretch right now...

Oh and what about lockheed, the question weirs was saying lockheed answered with out a doubt, I am confident now it was the prototype component in the patent and press release that proved the permittivity of the prototype works, if you read the rest of the interview, you will see that there is no commercial product ready, translation the difficulty of producing the product commercially is not there but all agree that once it is, it can be quickly scaled up.

steve said...



This will be a long post.


While anxiously awaiting B's coming follow through on new info, I've been hitting the web in a frantic and exhaustive wave of due diligence for ten hours straight today. And this isn't the first day I've spent doing this, but it was certainly the most interesting.

I was initially caught up in a red herring concerning a newsletter published by the city of CEDAR PARK in Spring 2006 which discussed an open house at EESTOR on March 25, 2006. The newsletter stated that a prototype ZENN car was exhibited that day which was powered by an EESTOR ESU. Needless to say, I was VERY intrigued by this assertion.

The following link provides quotes and an explanation about this open house:

That blog correctly points out that the City of Cedar Park has removed the newsletter from its server.

I then used the Way Back Machine (excellent search resource) to look for a saved image of the page, but somebody has gone to serious effort in removing all traces of this newsletter as a search for the year 2006 returns 2930 hits for the Cedar Park web site for that year, including all newsletters, but for late March through April 2006, all relevant pages have been removed. Plug this in your browser if you care to verify:*/*

Here was a mystery of epic proportions. Was a working EESTOR prototype exhibited that day or not? No blogs directly answered the question, but it was clear that Richard Weir pulled some strings to get that newsletter removed.

To make a long story short, and rather uneventful, it turns out that Zenn started a national tour of its NEV lead battery vehicle at this exact time. See this article published on April 14, 2006:

"Last month, the company began a two-coast US-based dealer tour; three production prototype ZENN vehicles are involved in the tours. Dealer tours will continue throughout May and June 2006."

So it's more likely than not that the Zenn car exhibited at EESTOR's open house on March 25th, 2006 was not powered by EESTOR and that the Cedar Park newsletter was erroneous. So close, but yet so far.

Winding down my exhaustive DD session, I kicked back to listen to an MP3 presentation given by Ian Clifford at the 2007 Roth Capital Partner's OC Conference in Febraury 2007.

The presentation proper wasn't really telling me anything new and the sound quality was kind of lame, so I was about to cut it short and hit the sack when some lucid intuition kept me listening until the last question was asked in the Q&A after the presentation. Here's what was said:

QUESTION: Tell me a little bit about the electronics changes that will need to happen with the EESTOR batteries and what you're doing about addressing that?

ANSWER: Well, interestingly, our agreement with EESTOR is that they deliver a product to our specifications. So the power electronics that are required to go from a high voltage ultracapacitor down to our operating voltages is their issue. We know who's working on that. We've talked to the the company that's working on that, on the power electronics and there don't seem to be any roadblocks at this point. Um, so we're comfortable that they'll deliver exactly what we spec.

You may listen to that presentation here:

I'd never read about or heard Ian Clifford speak about this other company who is involved with the production of EESTOR energy units. Once again, the intrigue returned and as I sat there pondering this strange development I scanned the web page where the MP3 is located only to find a comment which asked the same question living in my mind.

And to my amazing shock, Ian Clifford was right there with the answer. Ian Clifford, mercifully and shockingly pops up to answer this question and others right there in the comments section. After a 10 hour day of unanswered questions, I could not believe I was going to get a direct answer from Ian Clifford... to more than one question. He posted the following comments (see link above for Clifford's full response):

Hello all,

I am happy to answer any non-confidential specific questions you may have related to my presentation at the Roth Conference.

I'll pick a few from the posted comments:

RE: EEStor Prototypes.

Based on EEStor’s press release from January 16th, (and I quote) “It is anticipated that the relative permittivity of the current powder will-either meet and/or exceed 18,500, the previous level achieved when EEStor, Inc. produced prototype components using its engineering level processing equipment.”

So EEStor confirms that the components were prototyped and that the prototypes achieved the claimed permittivity. This was a very positive confirmation.

My comment on prototyping had to do more with delivery of Energy Storage Units (ESU) to ZENN. Since EEStor has prototyped, they are going straight to production, so ZENN will receive production, not prototype ESUs.


RE: Power Electronics.

It is correct that EEStor will supply production ESUs to ZENN specifications.And as I mentioned we have had discussions with the company doing the power electronics for EEStor and we are very comfortable with their ability to meet our requirements, now and in the future.


Ian Clifford

Chief Executive Officer

ZENN Motor Company
Posted by: Ian Clifford


So there you have it. Ian Clifford stated EESTOR has confirmed the existence of working prototypes and also that there's a mysterious third company involved in the production of commercial EESTOR units.

So very interesting.

Very Truly Yours,


marcus said...

Thanks for posting the results of all your hard work. I always found it hard to believe they didn't have a prototype after working on it for this long. At some point though I'm pretty sure I read some where that GM checked out EEStor early on as a potential supplier for the Volt but excluded them as they didn't have any prototypes to show, only lab book results. Perhaps this was wrong?

Gert said...

And as I mentioned we have had discussions with the company doing the power electronics for EEStor and we are very comfortable with their ability to meet our requirements, now and in the future.

All this says is some external party is working on the power convertor (converting to constant voltage, solving fast discharge safety problems,...). It is extremely likely they are not working with the actual ESU but just some other power source that has the same specs regarding power output. (eg diminishing voltage as power is used -> output voltage must remain constant).
Simulating the power output specs of the ESU is not so hard to do IMO, the real tough nut is the power storage, which is irrelevant for the simulator.

steve said...


Fortunately, you are dead wrong about GM. As recently as June 1st, 2008, Ian Clifford of ZENN is speaking with GM. In an interview at the GM-Volt blog on June 1st, Clifford said the following:

QUESTION: Have you guys spoken with GM at all?

IC: Yes, we have. I wont get into any details and to what level we are at, but interestingly a Volt with a ZENNergy drive is a kind of a sexy product. You never know. It would certainly be something we’d love to explore. As I said earlier were a little tiny company and it takes more and more proof of the technology to get the attention of the bigger companies. We’re working at it."

Marcus, you won't find an article on the web or elsewhere which backs up what you said in your post. No offense, this is not a flame. But there's an awful lot of half truths being passed around in comments on all of this. It's important to do research and put facts on the table.

Nowhere does it say GM passed on EESTOR because they didn't see a working prototype or that GM said EESTOR didn't have one.

That EESTOR "has no working prototypes" is the BIG mis-perception being spread by the skeptics. Let's clear up a few important misconceptions:

1. Lockheed Martin never said they've not seen a working prototype of an EESTOR energy unit.

Let's examine the critical exchanges between GM-VOLT Blog and Lionel Liebman, manager of Program Development – Applied Research at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control:

QUESTION: Have you been able to evaluate any of their current prototypes?

LL:That’s an effort that’s ongoing. We’re really just getting started to integrate their technology into some of the efforts that we have going on here. That’s going to be something that we’re doing this year.

QUESTION: So its a collaborative effort to build the prototypes then?

LL: That’s right.

QUESTION: Do they have something that they’ve tested that you’ve seen which makes you want to work with them?

LL: We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet. Its something that we’ll work on together this year.

Liebman's answers have been incorrectly spun by various commentators as meaning LM hasn't yet seen a working protoype. That's not what Liebman said at all. He said the effort to "evaluate" EESTOR prototypes is an "ongoing effort".

And he also said LM and EESTOR are collaborating to build prototypes.
But this answer probably means those prototypes are for future LM products utilizing EESTOR technology. He doesn't say that EESTOR has no working prototypes of energy units at all.

LL also said that LM hasn't
"personally tested" EESTOR prototypes, nowhere in that interview does it say LM has never "seen" a working prototype.

In fact, the correct use of the English language, when applied to Liebman's answer, "We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet", indicates that EESTOR does in fact have prototypes. What the hell else could "their prototypes" be?

Combine that with Ian CLifford's strong assertions in the comments section to his ROTH interview wherein Clifford says:

EEStor confirms that the components were prototyped and that the prototypes achieved the claimed permittivity. This was a very positive confirmation.

My comment on prototyping had to do more with delivery of Energy Storage Units (ESU) to ZENN. Since EEStor has prototyped, they are going straight to production, so ZENN will receive production, not prototype ESUs.

I just find it incredible that many people still think this is some pump and dump scam. EESTOR is a private company backed by some of the heaviest bad ass mofos around. In order for this to be a scam, think about the levels of deceit and/or stupidity necessary.

First, Richard Weir would have to be a total liar and thief.

Second, Ian Clifford would have to be a completely gullible idiot, or also a pathological liar along with everybody else at Zenn.

Third, Weir would have to be better at illusion than Chris Angel to get
a VC firm as sharp and successful as Kleiner Perkins to commit $3 million way back in 2005. Let's not forget that both Colin Powell and Al Gore are on the Board of Directors at KPBC, both having joined AFTER KPBC signed on with EESTOR. Chew on that.

Fourth, Lockheed Martin would have to be just as gullible and stupid to get involved here with nothing but Chinese Whispers. And Liebman's interview is being spun to mean just that. Geez.

I know we've all been burned before, and that things don't always live up to the hype, but really, some of the things being said about EESTOR and ZENN motives are just ridiculous FUD. None of the parties involved have any history of being involved in scams.

The only possible scenario where this could all possibly be BS is if the whole EESTOR story is an elaborate Government intelligence grey op created to scare the oil shieks and barons into some kind of deal with the powers that be. I can actually see that as a very distant remote possibility. Very distant in a galaxy far far away.

Just my opinion, of course. Do your own DD.

steve said...

Gert, your comments appear naive to me. IC said, "And as I mentioned we have had discussions with the company doing the power electronics for EEStor and we are very comfortable with their ability to meet our requirements, now and in the future."

EESTOR has brought in a company who is "doing the power electronics". According to IC, this unknown company is "doing" not fantasizing. Many people have been skeptical about EESTOR's ability to commercially produce these units on their own. Well now we have proof positive that they've subcontracted out this aspect of production assembly. Liebman of Lockheed Martin has stated that EESTOR has taken a very practical approach to being able to quick start commercial production.

You have postulated that this third company party doing the power electronics doesn't need anything but specs from EESTOR. I don't think the evidence backs up your proposition at all. I believe that if they are "doing" power electronics, they must have something to "do" it with.

In order for EESTOR and ZENN to have promised a commercially available EESTOR energy unit by the end of 2008, they must be close to having one or they already have one. That is unless you believe Weir is lying or just stupid. I don't believe that about Weir, EESTOR and ZENN.

I believe it's more likely than not that they have the goods and that this third party contractor's existence is further proof of that.

But hey, I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again. Do you own DD.

dmon said...

Steve, first of all, thanks for the DD work you've done. I'm convinced about your point 1 (working prototypes exist).

As to point 2, Gert is exactly right. Clifford's statement about a company "doing the power electronics" does not imply "building EESUs". There's going to be extensive glue circuitry between the capacitor (voltage proportional to charge) and the drive train, and the plain reading of his statement is that that's what he's talking about.

richterm said...

Thanks Steve - excellent detective work in finding that nugget by Clifford. Your reasoning is sound IMO, and is why I'm invested in Zenn. I believe there is a working prototype. Clearly even if our presumption that this is NOT a scam is true, there is still significan risk. Risk that Eestor never gets the production line working. Risk that they can't do it within a reasonable time in which Zenn can stay afloat. Etc.

As for GM, of course they could not publicly link their Volt efforts to Eestor. They'd get killed for that. Of course they want to proceed as if they will use the best advanced chem batteries. If Eestor proves their production line, THEN they can make that move. Until then, they don't need to give their stockholders/analysts more reason to be pissed off.

My take is that GM does not need Zenn in order to use Eestor in the Volt. GM can easily just make the Volt edge over the 3100lbs threshold of Zenn's rights. That is not all bad news for Zenn though, as a GM adoption of Eestor would create tremendous value in Zenn's equity stake in Eestor, validate the technology and provide tremendous publicity. It also leaves plenty of room for Zenn to make take advantage of their rights in small/mid cars and conversions.

steve said...


I never implied in any way that the third party contractor was building EESU's... That contractor is making the power electrics to adapt the EESU to ZENN's automobiles. Gert stated his assertion that this contractor does not have an EESU from EESTOR to adapt and that the contractor must be working off a a spec blueprint and not the real thing.

GERT is stating that EESTOR is not far enough developed to have provided a working energy storage units to this contractor and that the contractor is making these power electronics for ZENN cars from nothing but a spec sheet and I believe the evidence contradicts Gert's assertion.

I never said the third party contractor was building EESU's.

dmon said...

Steve, I read you wrong then. My bad.

steve said...

Re: Gert's statement,

To be fair, let me quote Gert directly:

"It is extremely likely they are not working with the actual ESU but just some other power source that has the same specs regarding power output. (eg diminishing voltage as power is used -> output voltage must remain constant)."

He didn't actually say they don't have a working EESU, he said it was "extremely unlikely", so I apologize for not getting that right in my response. Regardless, all things considered, I don't see how EESTOR could not have a working
eesu. That seems "extremely unlikely" when you really look at all of the players involved, their character as exhibited by history and success and the recent statements made taken as one body of evidence.

There are really only two possible options

EESTOR has the gun

or EESTOR is full of shit...

I believe they have the gun because it just seems "extremely unlikely" they would have gone on record with production dates etc without more than an idea and some blueprints.

steve said...

I am a moron today, I guess. I write a post trying to quote GERT properly and I misquote him again.

GERT didn't say EESTOR doesn't have an EESU, he said it is "extremely likely" that the third party contractor is not working with one in their design of power electrics for ZENN cars.

It's possible that both Gert and I are correct in that EESTOR could have the EESU, but not have the need to actually give that over to the third party contractor for them to adapt the power electrics.

The more I think about Gert's comments, the more I believe we could both be correct. If EESTOR has no need to ship the guts of its baby to a third party, they probably wouldnt take the risk of exposing it to sub-contractors.

But in order for the third party to be able to correctly adapt the power electrics to the assembly line, they will need an accurate simulator based upon something that really does exist rather than some vaporware concept which would almost certainly be subject to many changes along the way.

So, I believe Clifford's comments about this mysterious third party contractor are further proof that EESTOR is much closer to following through on its promises that most believe.

Apologies to GERT for mischaracterizing his statements.

steve said...

There's also this :

2008-06-18 19:04 ET - Prospectus Approved

Effective May 23, 2008, Zenn Motor Company Inc.'s prospectus dated May 23, 2008, was filed with and accepted by the TSX Venture Exchange, and filed with and receipted by the Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia securities commissions, pursuant to the provisions of the respective securities acts.

The TSX Venture Exchange has been advised that closing occurred on May 30, 2008, for gross proceeds of $15,225,000.

Agent: Paradigm Capital Inc.

Offering: 4.06 million shares (includes 325,000 common shares on the exercise of the agent's overallotment option)

Share price: $3.75 per share

Agent's options: 162,400 compensation options; each option is exercisable into one common share at a price of $3.75 for a period of 18 months

Agent's commission: $770,343.75

So Zenn just received $15 million. Check out Paradigm here

steve said...


I don't want to clog up the new thread (asking for questions to EESTOR) with off topic issues since it is by far the most important thread in any forum on the web concerning EESTOR... so let me just say thank you for all of your hard work in writing and maintaining this blog.

It is appreciated and it is valuable.

I have offered two versions of basically the same question. I do not want to be a hog, but please let me know if more questions are welcome or if it's one or two to a customer.

Thanks again

Tom Villars said...

It seems obvious to me that the very last thing Weir ever wants to see happen is for a prototype EESU to escape EEStor's control while they are still working on patent approvals. If the EESU falls into the wrong hands and they are able to reverse engineer the product then what happens next is a nightmare for EEStor.

Patents lawyers on all sides would go to war to prove their client was first and the whole process gets tied up in the courts for years.

steve said...


You make a very strong point and I have always thought this is why EESTOR is operating in such a secretive manner as well as doing such a fine job of controlling the information through its partners.

Have you noticed just how guarded Clifford and Lockheed have been when asked questions about prototypes. So many people just assume that they are cleverly dodging these questions which leads bloggers and the commentatorazi (the word is my invention... as far as I know) to assume the worst, to assume there are no working prototypes.

In fact, the comments by LM and Clifford, when read carefully indicate that the prototypes do exist. Add to this today's quotes form EESTOR to this blog that many of the people in the scientific community are going to have "egg on their face"... and it looks like we are in for interesting times.

marcus said...

Steve, I have no personal financial interest in whether its all real or not. There are just quite a few strange things about it all. A lot of the uncertainty does seem to stem from the guarded comments regarding prototypes. Why are they so indirect and guarded? To say "yes I've seen a working prototype" doesn't exactly give away any secrets or does it? I agree that most likely they are either amazing scammers or its for real. But If they had working prototypes why isn't GM convinced? All GM had to do was treat them like the battery companies and give them a deadline for delivery and testing. Why would an association between GM and EEStor be so bad for GM? And, why such an exclusive agreement with Zenn? Were EEStor THAT desperate and if so WHY? These are the things that are of concern in my opinion.

marcus said...

To bring up another strange point, I see this exclusivity with Zenn as potentially a serious bottleneck in getting this technology out to the world. Every person in the world has to get Zenn to retrofit their car? How long is that going to take??

steve said...


As to your first question, the best possible answers are twofold



As to number 1, would you trust GM with your baby, if you had the baby? Simple question. Back in 2002/2003, prior to Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth", clean tech wasn't the hip behemoth it is today. GM and big oil had alot to lose.

ZENN was already looking to the future, to a future of cleantech and changing the world. Weir made a character assessment of Zenn and saw them as intellectually and technologically spiritually worthy of a partnership.

Did GM deserve this technology with the way they've treated the planet and perhaps suppressed electric vehicles in the past? Did GM pass on cleantech a decade or more ago to favor their own wealth? I don't know for sure, but I've seen "Who Killed The Electric Car" and GM must be one of the suspects.

Would you trust GM with your prototype in 2003?

Perhaps it's not just about the money for Mr. Weir. Perhaps it's about changing the world and changing the players. I don't know. But what's so special about GM?

If Weir really has the goods (and I believe he does), Gm will line up at the right time as will all the big players. They will have no choice.

You said, "But If they had working prototypes why isn't GM convinced? All GM had to do was treat them like the battery companies and give them a deadline for delivery and testing. Why would an association between GM and EEStor be so bad for GM? And, why such an exclusive agreement with Zenn? Were EEStor THAT desperate and if so WHY? These are the things that are of concern in my opinion."

I don't see EESTOR's decision to work with ZENN as desperation, I see it as their desire to usher in a new frontier working with like minded individuals sharing a dream of reshaping the world in a cleaner, cheaper, more efficient manner.

GM had all the resources any company could ever dream of, but did they make a serious effort to change the world for the better? NO, GM like all of the fat cats of big auto and big oil were perfectly happy to maintain the status quo until their hands became forced.


And Zenn put their limited capital where their mouth was and took a chance on EESTOR and EESTOR took a chance on ZENN. It looks like an incredible story of America innnovation and American spirit.

As to your second question, Zenn's exclusivity is no bottleneck. They have stated they don't want to be an OEM manufacturer and that they are prepare to work with the GMs of this world... when the time is right.

They've done a damn good job promoting clean tech automboiles and they will be sitting in the catbird seat farming out to the big boys when the time is right. And there will be no bottleneck.

Let them get all the patents straight and all the ducks lined up. EESTOR and ZENN know what they are doing and they are doing a damn fine economical job as far as I can see. They know the big boys are necessary to the big picture, but they have structured this deal so that they control the situation to their own design. Can you blame them for believing they know what's best?

Marcus, dreamers believe in dreamers. As far as I can see, that's what this is all about.
Most of the commentatorazi fail to acknowledge that ZENN was on the scene three years before Kleiner Perkins.

Zenn and EESTOR were talking back in 2002. Kleiner didn't invest in EESTOR until 2005. It's important to understand the timeline.

I'm a believer, but do your own DD.
Getting in there and reading everything, every comment... taking in all the FUD with the hype and putting on your mental scale is the only way to find the balance or truth. What most people consider DD just doesn't cut it. Do your own DD.

marcus said...

Ok Steve I also have seen "Who killed..." and I do have to agree that in 2003 I wouldn't have trusted GM one iota. I hadn't thought of this angle. All I can say is I hope you are right, for the planet's sake!

Gert said...

Steve, I wasn't saying that EEstor doesn't have a working prototype. I was saying you can't deduce that from the fact that a third party is making the power electronics because they likely won't have (or even need) a working ESU to build the power electronics. I have a degree as electronics engineer and I worked for a company that was designing a hybrid car. We worked with 3rd party battery suppliers. They never sent us any actual batteries (untill very late in the development process when the batteries would be in production), only specs and simulation models (SimuLink) with a guarantee that their products matched up with the specs. But the thing is, you don't need the actual batteries to design the power electronics. A prototype battery is very, very, very expensive and contains a lot of information that you don't want to give out to a third party just like that. That sensitive information is how energy is stored, which is of 0 relevance to the people building the power electronics which can use a 1000 dollar power source as simulator just as easily.

steve said...


Yeah, I see your point... see my comments in this thread correcting my intitial (eeroneous) critique of your post on this topic.

Thanks for the extra background on the process though. Are you drafting a question for the "ask EEstor" thread?

I'm interested to see what you throw out there.