Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

Axion Power Host
Send Message
Trying to learn stuff
Back To Axion Power Host's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (256)
Track new comments
  • I'll let somebody else be first.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:03 PM Reply Like
  • Maya, LOL


    No, the electric car is not a failure

    17 Oct 2012, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • It will be and not necessarily due to consumer acceptance. The elephant in the living room is resource constraints and there's no getting around that beast.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:18 PM Reply Like
  • I had to add some balance. Always good to hear out those with differing views.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    I noticed at the end of that article that the Christian Science Monitor was looking for bloggers with some expertise in the area. Maybe you could let them know about that elephant.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • The funny part is I have no quarrel with futurists who want to talk about what conditions might be in 2020 because my crystal ball is limited to a five year horizon and beyond that be dragons. Who knows, somebody might figure out how to make batteries from salt and motors from sand. I've seen way too many miracles in the last 40 years. I just know Tesla doesn't have the right stuff.


    Now that could be a fun title for the article I'll most certainly write on their September 30 financial statements ;-)
    17 Oct 2012, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • "Telsa does not have the Right Stuff"


    It might draw the ire of a few commentators. I was looking at the Telsa puts. They are certainly pricey. Makes one think that the demand for them might be a little high. But one could acheive a 10 bagger by buying the $14 puts and having the stock go to $9 by March.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • I think $9 by March is a bit on the aggressive side, but I guess anything could happen. The stock went up yesterday as A123 went under and everybody in the world started chanting a dirge for the EV. With that kind of emotional support network, picking the date that reality will sink in is tough.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:56 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist: Check the volatility, real and implied. That *should* be the reason they are pricey.




    EDIT: I forgot to add, the options market-makers are greedy too and take advantage of less astute buyers.
    17 Oct 2012, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Sorry HTL,
    was trying to be to cute with my wording. I understand time and volatility. Thanks for caring and the warning.
    17 Oct 2012, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist: that's the trouble with keyboars - can't see the wry grins, raised eyebrows, faux astonishment, ...


    Oh well. Even when I can see those things it sometimes just goes "WHOOSH" on me! :-\


    But in this case, at least, I have a plausible excuse! ;-))


    17 Oct 2012, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • Linear Tech. getting ready for the 42 VDC power net.


    60V Battery Charging Controller & Power Manager

    17 Oct 2012, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco,
    To those of us who are elecrically challenged what exactly does your comment mean. Do I need one of these $4 items? If it will help sell millions of PbC batteries I will buy my Linear Tech controller right now.
    17 Oct 2012, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist, Basically in a vehicle it takes electronics to marry the various generation, storage and loads to they can work together. They all function in specific voltage ranges and require that these ranges be maintained as they are switched on and off. This voltage needs to not only be maintained in specific ranges but it also needs to be kept clean meaning that transients (noise) needs to be kept in a specified range. Usually the electronic loads are the most sensitive. This can be a task in a system where different resistive, capacitive and inductive loads are presented in almost infinite variations.


    You can kind of think of it like the inverter in the Rosewater Hub. The main difference being that the Hub is also converting between AC and DC signals. But it's also taking various voltages and noise and creating a voltage source with a specified distortion.


    This task gets harder and harder requiring more complex power conditioning circuits as we progress historically from a base vehicle with a couple electric motors, a LAB, a radio and an alternator that only work once the vehicle is running to vehicles with a number of generating sources, storage and a ton of motors/electronics needing to run with the engine being cycled. Well Toto, We're not in Kansas any more.


    Hope this helps at a base level.
    17 Oct 2012, 04:39 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks for the primer. So this controller is operating at a higher voltage that cars didn't need in the past. The auto industry suppliers are ready to accept the dual battery approach for stop/start with regenerative braking. They can make the stuff the auto industry needs.


    Won't that take a battery with really good DCA?
    17 Oct 2012, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • Well the DCA is really a separate conversation. The DCA specifies how much of a charge can be accepted over a period of time. Up to a point the more the better. This increases the odds that the next event that wants the engine to turn off can be initiated as the opportunities present themselves. Also if you can fill the accumulator quicker you will hold more energy and allow for the engine off event to be of a longer duration. An ultracap is even better but it just costs too much to hold the amount of energy required for the task. Thus a hybrid system married in the vehicle or by tech like that offered by East Penn or Axion.


    Or maybe out the door VRLA is good enough? I would be pissed if someone sold me VRLA for the task. But it's only because we know better.
    17 Oct 2012, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco,
    At this point we are talking around each other saying the same thing. I will have to be more careful and exact with the electrical language.
    If I were now going to answer the first question I asked you:
    "To those of us who are elecrically challenged what exactly does your comment mean"


    I would answer this way. Presently cars have a 12v battery that takes a 16v or so controller/converter. Cars need togo to a 16v or higher voltage system in order to power more stuff on the cars. This new product is up and ready to handle the job.


    Auto makers can accept the Axion dual battery approach and then they can avoid the DCA problem of other batteries.


    Do I get a gold Star? Or did I FUBAR it?
    17 Oct 2012, 05:21 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist, But they will also in the future work toward even higher voltages as you suggest. Thus my 42 VDC comment. But that's perhaps a little longer term. Perhaps 3 smaller PbC's. Then would a flooded battery be required? Perhaps not.


    Here. I'll put on my battery powered TFH and beam you over your gold start.
    17 Oct 2012, 05:34 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist, This may be of interest.


    Challenges in automotive power regulation

    17 Oct 2012, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Chinese auto supplier reiterates interest in acquiring A123



    ...."The deal could be countered by other offers that would be more beneficial to AONE's creditors," Jefferies analyst Peter Nesvold said in a research note. "Wanxiang is the most likely other participant in this process, and we are not aware of other suitors at this time."
    17 Oct 2012, 03:57 PM Reply Like
  • Here's my technical analysis of today's action:



    Anybody got some gel?
    17 Oct 2012, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • But on the good news (barely) front:


    "Norfolk Southern, Union Pacific were revenue adequate for 2011, STB says"



    On the other hand, that was 2011. 2012 much more challenging.


    And good news on NSC's Cresent Corridor:
    17 Oct 2012, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • WTB,
    Thanks for the link. It takes an 11% ROI for a railroad to be on sound future footing. Only two railroads did that in 2011. Wow. This means that NS is in a position to upgrade its fleet and rail network. It means that NS passes the Federal Government litmus test of being financially sound. Grant ready?
    17 Oct 2012, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • (AXPW): Shorts 300576, 31.82% - not as high as I expected.


    17 Oct 2012, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, Not good to get caught with your shorts down. Usually. :-I
    17 Oct 2012, 05:36 PM Reply Like
  • HTL: so what does that mean? Does that mean more MM to MM intra-trading verse retail, or less... or am I completely missing the boat?
    17 Oct 2012, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • OR: It likely just means that I over-estimated the *amount* by which an MM got caught out of position, or that wasn't the case at all, and/or my T+3 share inflow is "fuzzy" at best, as when one time I guessed based on them flowing in sooner than expected and sais "Well, forget that" and this time I figured only the quantity for T+3 back flowed in (44K would've arrived last night).


    But *your* suggestion could also be in play.


    Watch point: over the last three months the largest *percentage* spikes came *after* high volume days.


    Can't say it will play the same, but one asks "Why would it change now"?


    Keeping things in perspective, 300K+ and 31.82% is not insignificant, especially after these recent percentages: 60.3%, 13.9%, 13.1%, 7.6%, 17.7%, 14.3%, 18.9%, and 8.6%.


    17 Oct 2012, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • Not as low as I expected, so I guess our over-under was a bust that carries forward.
    17 Oct 2012, 11:23 PM Reply Like
  • John: with my record, I glad to get a "push". I'm *hoping* that 300K is a large enough volume that the MMs will just let them net out. Thinking of the late-day action with price weakness and volume, I *suspect* they don't though. And the nasty part of trying to figure "what's next" from that is that *if* they did cover, the purchased shares *potentially* arrive in their portfolios at the same time as the the shares backing the sell orders the market-makers shorted arrive.


    *if* I'm guessing right, they can let the incoming shares backing sell orders net out and have a substantial number in their portfolios with a net cost around $0.29xx-$0.30xx. To me this suggests we should see prices hold generally *above* $0.30xx (and I'd even guess >= $0.31) over the next couple of days. Higher is better for them and I'll be looking to see what the MM actions are before open and subsequently.


    This A/M. (07:52 EDT) they are showing bids >=$0.2995 from NITE, CDEL, TEJS ($0.3025)


    18 Oct 2012, 07:53 AM Reply Like
  • Amlak, Exclusive and official representative? For Axion? Perhaps something getting lost in the translation.

    17 Oct 2012, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • ii,
    For Rosewater also. I think this is part of the middle east connection that Rosewater was talking about. Based in Bahrain, with offices in Qatar, Jordan and Canada.
    17 Oct 2012, 06:44 PM Reply Like
  • A little info on the Chairman:
    17 Oct 2012, 07:04 PM Reply Like
  • The website might have changed its format but the exclusive relationship language has been on the AMLAK website since Rosewater first came on the scene. This is the oil rig use of the PbC that was suppose to help launch Rosewater and the PbC onto the world scene. So far nothing. Doesn't mean that it isn't working. Just so far nothing in any oil well application.
    17 Oct 2012, 07:52 PM Reply Like
  • Hey graphene lovers.


    Here's a great new article from ars technica about our favorite unobtainium nanomagic.


    "The Graphene Age isn't (quite) here yet"


    Small excerpt:


    The amazing research we've seen being performed with graphene has all relied upon high-quality samples. As you might expect, achieving the best electrical and mechanical properties requires the most expensive and painstaking process: mechanical exofoliation. In this technique, graphene flakes are individually extracted using adhesive tape. This process is not scalable, so it is essentially useless in manufacturing terms.


    Other methods are far more scalable, but currently trade off on quality.


    Liquid-phase exfoliation involves suspending carbon-carrying materials (such as graphite) in a liquid with high surface tension, then bombarding the suspension with sound to extract graphene flakes.
    Chemical vapor deposition (CVD) condenses a volatile substance containing carbon onto a copper surface. The graphene layer that forms can then be peeled off onto another substrate. CVD is frequently used to make other thin-film systems for electronic devices.
    Growing graphene directly onto a silicon carbide wafer by selectively extracting the silicon atoms in the top layer via sublimation (vaporizing a solid).
    17 Oct 2012, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • Couldn't they get a robot to use the scotch tape? That would make it scalable. Probably having trouble when the tape breaks on the roller and you can't find the edge to begin again. Drives the robots crazy I bet.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:37 AM Reply Like
  • The ultimate green vehicle... Or maybe brown vehicle?


    Compost powered cars.

    17 Oct 2012, 11:11 PM Reply Like
  • Interesting diagnosis on why stop/start is no longer working in the 2009 VW Passat Estate (Blue Motion 2)... Ultimately determines it is a battery problem.

  Curious as to what kind of battery it was.
    17 Oct 2012, 11:11 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan, thanks for that post.


    Interesting because this is a far above the average run of the mill owner. I'd love to have a one on one with him for 15 minutes as, based on the vehicle age, he's done pretty well. But alas we don't know know much about his driving pattern. His driving distance/day is very healthy for the battery but after that we just don't know.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:10 AM Reply Like
  • Agreed. I tried to post a comment/question, but I didn't feel like creating an account. It says that he commutes 65 miles per day, so it sounds like it could be a lot of highway driving.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:43 AM Reply Like
  • My happy thought for the day.
    If Toyota is indeed our mystery Asian OEM, then BMW must be quite happy with the results of their testing of the PbC, thus far, in order to share their results with Toyota. Toyota must be equally impressed to take up the testing based on BMW's results.


    and any further wise cracks about Kansas or gray hair (as posted further up in this concentrator) and I won't post any more happy thoughts. And yes I did have a dog that everyone called Toto.
    18 Oct 2012, 08:29 AM Reply Like
  • I share this article:


    Is This The Cost Effective Lithium Battery Solution Wall Street and Industry Have Been Waiting For?



    18 Oct 2012, 08:41 AM Reply Like
  • Carlos: "Lead acid power system usually needs to be replaced annually, as well as have scheduled maintenance, both of which adds cost. Flux`s solutions are very low maintenance, last for five or more years and charge faster than lead acid systems, all of which are significant advantages for their lead acid replacement customers".


    ISTM that the PbC could be more-than competitive in this market, *if* energy density is sufficient, because we know the price advantage of the PbC combinded with a 5 (to 10?) year lifetime should make TCO much more attractive.


    Adding the the recyclability, potential larger supplier base (if LA manufacturers adopt the PbC as part of their product line), no need for the same level of sophistication in a BMS (making it cheaper?), ... seems to suggest that the FLUX solution *might* have some stiff competition.


    18 Oct 2012, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • In a word, NO.


    They don't make batteries or have any technology. They're a reseller for a Chinese cell manufacturer.


    Flux just completed a reverse merger and as near as I can tell doesn't have a pot or a window. Their Form 10-K reflects $5 million in total assets and $7.1 million in debt for a Stockholders DEFICIT of $2.1 million.


    Given the history, we won't have a clear picture till their Form 10-Q is filed but I'd stay as far away as possible.
    18 Oct 2012, 09:53 AM Reply Like
  • ...They don't make batteries or have any technology. They're a reseller for a Chinese cell manufacturer.


    They still selling illusions.
    18 Oct 2012, 09:57 AM Reply Like
  • So their BMS isn't technology?


    Or are you suggesting that's not theirs either?
    18 Oct 2012, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • Read their annual report on Form 10-K that was filed a couple weeks ago. – – and then ask yourself how the detail squares with a $72 million market cap compared to Axion's $35 million.


    A BMS is primarily software with simple cell control circuitry.
    18 Oct 2012, 10:18 AM Reply Like
  • Is this their BMS?

    18 Oct 2012, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • 10/17/2012: (AXPW) EOD stuff partially copied from instablog.
    # Trds: 111, MinTrSz: 140, MaxTrSz: 74250, Vol 944468, AvTrSz: 8509
    Min. Pr: 0.3100, Max Pr: 0.3400, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3219
    # Buys, Shares: 64 499004, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3253
    # Sells, Shares: 45 420464, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3175
    # Unkn, Shares: 2 25000, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.3280
    Buy:Sell 1.19:1 (52.8% “buys”), DlyShts 300576 (31.8%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 71.49%


    In a comment here I wondered if a market-maker had gotten caught out of position by the early strong price rise and volume on the buying (buy:sell of 4.14:1, 259,556 vs. 62,500, ~80.5% "buys", VWAP $0.3332). I surmised that they then moved price down to get to a more market-neutral position: “... move price to make both additional shorting (both drive price lower and bring his market position closer to market at the time) and "covering buys" possible.


    *If* that is what happened, it worked well. From 12:37 through 13:05, VWAP was $0.3132, well below the $0.3332 VWAP seen through 11:15. 157K shares traded during this period, a bit less than half the 347K through 11:15”. Then the intra-day statistics through 13:05 EDT showed things had moved to a more balanced stance.


    I expected a high short sales percentage, possibly above 60%, but it came in ultimately well below that, although in both quantity and percentage it was a hefty move: as detailed in this comment:


    In response to Bang's comment that MACD might be indicating a stumble, I pointed out that many positive indicators were in play here


    One thing I want to mention briefly: in the recent past short sales spikes have come after high-volume days. I've not yet been able to figure what this means, but have some working theories around MMs pushing price lower to do covering buys at lower prices, relatively few shares backing sell orders prior to the high-volume flowing in, ... but there's absolutely nothing I can examine so far and reach any even tentative conclusion as to the reason.


    Not much to add other than maybe yesterday's high price early got the rest of the folks who are traders and bought during that 18 days below $0.30 out of the market. Can't know, but with 8 days of trying to break above both $0.33 and the descending resistance line (currently ~$0.316 AFAICT) of our falling trading channel, on aggregate volume of ~578.5K, there's at least a reason to be hopeful. This might let us finally break up (after the market-makers take care of themselves?) and away from them and the 50-day SMA (currently $0.3037 and flat and getting ready to rise).


    The "Dly Sht % of 'sells'" is omitted here.


    18 Oct 2012, 08:53 AM Reply Like
  • For the long-time (long-suffering) holders, this 1-page excerpt might pick you up. (If the link doesn't take you directly to the right excerpt, it's today's = Oct 18th).



    I thinks it pretty well sums up while I'm still a holder. The investment world hasn't discovered Axion yet, but it will.


    (BTW - The site has an email sign up service.)
    18 Oct 2012, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • mds5375


    Excellent link...thanks!
    18 Oct 2012, 11:14 AM Reply Like
  • ELBC Presentations on-line


    For those who really like digging into technical detail Heide Budde-Meiws of the RWTH-AACHEN has posted her ELBC presentation on laser microscopy and her DCA Workshop presentation on-line.



    While much of her analysis is pretty dense, the laser microscope pictures of sulfation in her ELBC presentation are very impressive.


    You'll have to enter an e-mail address to get a 24 hour download link, but they're worthwhile for the technically inclined.
    18 Oct 2012, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks John, That's a good presentation.


    Sad to see the EFB starts to get good dynamic charge acceptance right about the time the battery will not last due to higher operating temperatures (pg 40). It was bad enough knowing how infrequent SS would work in my climate based on when it is disabled due to lower temperatures. Now I find out how infrequently it is going to function due to poor DCA another huge percentage of the year because of the cooler climate where I live. :(


    Every time you post another presentation Axion looks better.


    And (pg 19) note "AGM not better than flooded battery"


    One other point of interest, the SS function helps initially with DCA but alas not near long enough.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:10 PM Reply Like
  • I was very surprised by her presentation in the DCA Workshop that showed the stop-start duty cycle was better for a battery than the conventional car duty cycle.


    One of the more fascinating discussions was when Eckhard Karden explained that the Axion-BMW micro-hybrid duty cycle simulation was too slow for their initial screening needs and they got to the right answers faster by using a test cycle that worked the battery for a half hour and then let it rest for five hours.
    19 Oct 2012, 01:31 AM Reply Like
  • John, Speaking of Dr. Eckhard Karden. Did you ever get a clean copy of the visually "messed up" presentation you shared a piece of with us some time ago? If you did and it's something you could share I'd appreciate a look.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • I'm not entirely sure which presentation you're referring to. If you want to wade through Karden's entire ELBC presentation you can find it here:
    19 Oct 2012, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • John, I think it was from his presentation at the AABC in late May early June. If I recall correctly you got an advanced copy of his presentation but it was sent in a form which was not fully legible.
    19 Oct 2012, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • My latest article on TheStreet

    18 Oct 2012, 11:07 AM Reply Like
  • " "


    Good article, JP! Conceptual equivalency of irrattic power supply with pollution and appropriate to application of the "polluter pays" principle is very, very good IMO.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    the new article was very well written. It sure got me thinking about the real cost of electricity generation.
    Which always brings me back to "waste less is the best form of power generation".
    There are many ways to make the grid smarter and better. Legislating huge amounts of intermittent energy might not be one of those ways.
    18 Oct 2012, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • It's scary stuff when you start following things down the rabbit hole.


    Now that I've put the words on paper the proposition seems self-evident, but it's not a discussion I've ever seen before.


    Let the rabble be roused, and make all renewable power generators buy 15 minutes of storage as a requirement for their grid connection ;-)
    18 Oct 2012, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • I like this centense a lot:


    "He's convinced these sectors are emerging investment mega-trends."
    18 Oct 2012, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • They have to be mega-trends Paol because we've finally reached a point where waste is more expensive than storage. It doesn't work in all applications but it works in some. As the cost of waste increases, storage must become attractive for more and more applications.
    19 Oct 2012, 01:33 AM Reply Like
  • So, we're back at $.29x again.


    Like the Cactus Airforce operating out of Henderson Field, Guadacanal, in 1942, the sirens have sounded and its once again time for the weary pilots (in this case, bottom feeders) to mount their Wildcats and sally forth to do battle...
    18 Oct 2012, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • Adding shares...


    Could use some help here, more than one small turtle can digest...
    18 Oct 2012, 12:52 PM Reply Like
  • Sorry.
    Abandoned my $0.20 offer weeks ago and then started buying at around $0.30 recently. No cash left to play with.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:57 PM Reply Like
  • Put in bid for 10K all-or-none @ the ask (.295) with 5K on offer at that price.
    18 Oct 2012, 01:22 PM Reply Like
  • 10K purchase thru Scottrade confirmed.
    18 Oct 2012, 01:26 PM Reply Like
  • I've got your back, Tripple...
    18 Oct 2012, 02:44 PM Reply Like
  • Bid another 10K AON @ .30 with 5K reportedly on offer at that price.
    18 Oct 2012, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • And another buy confirmed.
    18 Oct 2012, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • I'd rather let BTIG and the other sellers land first then raid their plane.
    18 Oct 2012, 11:39 AM Reply Like
  • $.28x and dropping...


    I think I still have that old program waiting at $.25...
    18 Oct 2012, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • AYFKM?


    18 Oct 2012, 11:57 AM Reply Like
  • IHY!
    18 Oct 2012, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • I sure hope it's only temporary, but yesterday and this morning's big drops on big volume look like the other big selling periods we've had.
    18 Oct 2012, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • I don't believe it is Axionistas or gamers selling trading blocks today unless someone got caught with their pants down.
    18 Oct 2012, 11:53 AM Reply Like
  • MO is MMs doing their thing to buy covering shares at a big profit. Some stats will appear shortly below.


    18 Oct 2012, 12:06 PM Reply Like
  • Help me understand who is selling them their covering shares?
    18 Oct 2012, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • Bang, People that have a profit from short term buys in the .20's and people that say No Mas. All part of investing.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:15 PM Reply Like
  • Bang: as Iindelco said. And don't forget, we have a plethora of market-makers representing a plethora^some-exponent of traders, investors. MMs are in competition and they all bought and sold at different prices.


    And since they are exempt from naked short rules, they can even short to each other with impunity.


    Just imagine you can create "phantom shares" at will and you are well capitalized, have lots of computers, can see deep into your own order book (and maybe see a lot more than that?), ...


    How do you make money in this case? Create phantom shares and move the market. This has been a big complaint from "regular" investors for a *long* time. The structure allows MMs to avoid getting on the Reg SHO list because if an MM needs to deliver in three days, there's another MM out there that will happily short and in the requisite three days Voila! Settlement shows the needed shares coming into the MM's account.


    Think of a "daisy chain". These shares can flow around and around indefinitely and never cause a Reg SHO event. After enough time passes with share prices being quashed by "phantom shares", somebody who's not an MM gives up and tosses in their shares.


    Add in that there's lots of exemptions to the T+3 rule - I recall reading a scenario where up to 47 days could be used up just by the interaction between brokers, market-makers and the clearing process before anybody potentially gets "caught".


    I can't prove this is what goes on, but with a Rip-van-SEC watching porn when they do awaken and FINRA being a "Sel-Regulatory Organization" (SRO) composed of the organizations that they regulate - you can stop laughing at your convenience.


    18 Oct 2012, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • BTW, re MMs "naked shorting" creating "phantom shares". "The industry" argued *strenuously* for exemptions from the Reg SHO naked shorting rules (properly called "borrow before short") during the hearings back in ... 2009(?) as "being necessary for effective market-making".


    You may resume your laughter if you desire.


    18 Oct 2012, 01:05 PM Reply Like
  • "I can't prove this is what goes on, but with a Rip-van-SEC watching porn....."


    HTL, LOL. They learned it was appropriate during a Pentagon tour! :-I

    18 Oct 2012, 01:06 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: there's an old CNBC video when the cameras were in SEC for a story and in the background porn was observed on work station. Got heavy commentary at the time. I bet you can still find it on CNBC.


    18 Oct 2012, 01:08 PM Reply Like
  • Could we place lures into the water? what would happen if we all placed a GTC sell order around say .42? could we gert the MM to play their games where its a little greener?
    18 Oct 2012, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, I remember seeing it already. I'd bet nobody was fired.


    Remember the Pentagon incident as well. They sent out an E-mail telling everyone to cut it out. That'll show them we mean business!


    More of your tax dollars at work.
    18 Oct 2012, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • Tim: for that to work, we'd have to be on the buy side. And even then they might sell to us cheaper.


    18 Oct 2012, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • I think H.T.L is correct
    18 Oct 2012, 02:44 PM Reply Like
  • "I think H.T.L is correct" - no doubt, just hoping for a way to get the MM attention and thought a couple million shares for sale at 42 might do it (also trying to find ways this group could be influential). Shows you how much I don't know...
    18 Oct 2012, 07:49 PM Reply Like
  • I've been thinking about the Navy yard net-zero building. Net zero buildings don’t always have batteries. The ones I am familiar with have solar panels that tie into the grid and generate electricity to make up for what the building uses.


    What is the real benefit of the mini-Cube being included on this project? The press release from January says “the mini-Cube will provide demand response energy storage that will be grid network tied, will be linked to a 32kW solar panel array and will supply standby power service for this Zero Energy Administration Building.”


    Tell me if I’m wrong. It sounds like these batteries are in the middle between the grid and the solar array. One of their missions is to provide back-up power. Most exciting is the “demand response” language, because it speaks to a second mission and a possible economic benefit to the owner of the system. Is it possible there is an agreement with the local utility to provide demand response services (load absorbing at times of excess capacity and providing power to the grid at times of peak demand) and be paid for it?


    As I write this I am realizing there is another explanation. Most likely no agreement is needed but the building will draw from the mini-Cube when power is expensive, thereby saving its owner (in this case the US Navy) money.
    18 Oct 2012, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • Since I'm never happy unless the rabble is adequately roused, I wrote an article today that concludes unbuffered renewable power sources that feed intermittent current into the grid are polluters of the commons, even if the electrons are squeaky clean.



    Mu rationale is that stability and reliability are the two indispensable characteristics of the power grid in industrialized societies. To the extent that a renewable producer forces instability into the grid, then the burden falls on somebody else to abate that instability.


    Every other industry in the world is expected to pay the cost of cleaning up the mess it creates. Why should renewable energy be an exception?
    18 Oct 2012, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • Accidently posted this above ...


    I like the thought of pushing the costs back into the intermittent generation process because it makes the real costs more transparent *and*, through rates, spreads the actual costs relatively fairly among all the beneficiaries of the facilities (if we assume elimination of subsidies) rather than onto a select group, such as taxpayers, and lets the established utilities focus on the things they should be operationally concerned about - reliable generation and *delivery* - without "how to compensate for government-mandated instability and costs".


    18 Oct 2012, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • D-Lane,


    The military realizes it is highly dependent on local US grids for waging war. A future war will likely incur grid and infrastructure damage. Could be from from software and Internet cyber war, or from targeted "terrorism" internal to the US. The next big war is likely to be about energy disruptions, and you can't win a modern war without huge amounts of energy. For example, if major oil disruptions mean coal can't be delivered to generating stations that power NSA, GPS ground stations, etc., and diesel is not available for backup power.... not a pretty sight.


    They are working very hard to reduce their energy footprint and increase their energy systems robustness. Whether they sell any ancillary services to the grids are totally irrelevant.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:06 PM Reply Like
  • That makes sense Rick.


    But I'd still like to hear more about how the demand response function works at the navy yard installation.
    18 Oct 2012, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • Yes sir. A bid for 19, Nine nine nine. Hmmm. ;)
    18 Oct 2012, 12:08 PM Reply Like
  • (AXPW): notes on the early action (through 11:33).


    Yesterday's short volume 300576, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3219.


    09:30 – 11:11 min $0.2995, max $0.3139, VWAP $0.3027, volume 307,950 shares traded, AvTrSz: 17500, and 21 trades had been done with a buy:sell of 1:13.59 (5.7% “buys”).


    So, potentially, all of yesterday's short sales could have been covered at a near 2 cents profit. And all this likely induced some additional "panic" selling.


    Immediately thereafter, a few trades went at $0.30. And then the pressure continued, but the buying improved big-time - my guess MMs taking advantage in an "accumulation phase".


    Through 11:24, min $0.2955, max $0.3139, 30 trades VWAP $0.3023, average trade size 10,750, buy:sell 1:5.41 (15.6% “buys”). Note the big buy:sell improvement.


    Through 11:33 min. $0.2900, max $0.3139, VWAP $0.301, volume 394K, average trade size 6,355, 37 trades with buy:sell 1:4.13 (19.5% “buys”). Note the buy:sell continues to improve.


    Total short sales last three days ~397.88.


    Trading then went dead. MMs accomplished their goals.


    Bid/ask currently TEJS 5K $0.2905, BTIG ask 5K $0.295.


    18 Oct 2012, 12:15 PM Reply Like
  • There was a time when folks thought that MM's had no interest in gaming microcaps for pennies...


    Automation sure does change things, eh?


    Events have proved that the quantmonkies are willing to trash billions in market cap to make a few thousand.


    Now we just see it happen, and shrug.


    The new normal.
    18 Oct 2012, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • "Automation sure does change things, eh?"


    Except the necessary thing - the behavior of people within the system.


    18 Oct 2012, 12:53 PM Reply Like
  • Am I hearing from recent posts that there is a thought that MM's may, can and do buy and sell non existent shares?
    18 Oct 2012, 03:28 PM Reply Like
  • Market makers can and do short shares without borrowing them first as part of the normal market making function. It's a very popular topic of individual investor legend and lore but it's something I believe is very rare in practice because nothing gets a market maker in a jam faster than traders who decide to speculate with the market maker's capital.
    18 Oct 2012, 03:44 PM Reply Like
  • Albert: more than "recent" posts. Yes they can do that. They should do it only with caution though - there is a settlement process that must be satisfied and if things go wrong they could suffer.


    Usually they would short mostly only the quantity specified on some sell order they've received.


    18 Oct 2012, 03:46 PM Reply Like
  • tb/HTL/John


    HTL...I conceptually grasp your TA...hopefully if time allows want to drill down more.
    So I have more questions than even close to comprehending more fully.


    "There was a time when folks thought that MM's had no interest in gaming microcaps for pennies..."


    Question...assuming the validity/soundness of the AXPW story (I do)...given the volatility of penny stocks...assuming the volatility of the market in general...especially with the most recent energy related bankruptcies AONE/SATCON...are we looking at this as another short term pain (AXPW stockholders) where the MM are risking, as bangwhiz said, "...someone got caught with their pants down"...if the supply/demand trigger or news (equity partner-OEM announcement) evolves quickly?
    i.e.... is the short term "gaming" at risk to get burned bad if a positive story comes out on any given day?
    19 Oct 2012, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Magounsq: "is the short term "gaming" at risk to get burned bad if a positive story comes out on any given day?"


    *if* market-makers have been foolish enough to get a *large* position on the short side, that's always a risk *if* *strong* volume and substantial price appreciation occurs.


    Normally they would *not* be caught in such a position. Their positions are, of necessity, short-term in nature. As I mentioned somewhere, I think their business model is predominately an arbitrage model.


    Even if they do get caught, their ability to continue shorting and keep their short position very near market prices should allow them to exit with very little damage *if* they don't get caught in a regulatory problem first.


    I think only *sustained* buying with constant, more or less, price appreciation can make them stumble.


    A *possible* example of how quickly they can rectify such situations is the recent price moves as we got rejected,at last after nine days of trying to move past $0.33. The volume and price and price action could have allowed them to completely exit their short positions at a profit in a single day.


    Most of the larger and more experienced and well-capitalized firms will never (uh, NITE's recent fiasco in mind, "seldom") find themselves in such a position.


    19 Oct 2012, 11:48 AM Reply Like
  • Depressing :-(

    18 Oct 2012, 12:52 PM Reply Like
  • I try to not worry about intraday stuff.


    However, I have to let you in on a secret. I recently closed a few positions and yesterday opened a position in Google. Whoops.


    Also of note is that I have owned shares of both Radian (RDN) and Syncora (SYCRF). I sold all of my Radian last week from April and June (ave cost of 2.89) for $4.38, and half my position in Syncora (ave cost of $.31) sold for $.55. All that went into more AXPW.
    18 Oct 2012, 01:53 PM Reply Like
  • Congrats on the gains Mr. Holty!


    18 Oct 2012, 02:13 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. Holty... Did you buy any protective Puts with that Google purchase?
    18 Oct 2012, 02:46 PM Reply Like
  • Nope on Goog protective puts.


    The other problem and I was poor in mentioning it is after waiting for a year on Syncora to prove me right I sold half. Its run upto $.94 at the time I type this in a week.


    My losses on Goog today have completely offset my gains from my Radian and Syncora sales. You work so hard to bank profits and then do something stupid. I really need to stop have three sizes in my portfolio; speculative and regular and AXPW. It used to be two but using any idea of risk mgmt i am way overweight in AXPW but I can't sell any. Sadly of the three other times I have felt this way with a company, two ended in tears and once I did real well. I'm sorry if I have cursed any of you.


    One of the other ones was Bioexx in Canada. The difference there is that mgmt wasn't lying but they were not being forthright with difficulties in scaling production. Turned out while the conversion from lab to commercial process was worked out, what wasn't was running them all together in a continous process. That taught me an important lesson that I think AXPW has gotten past with their two lines. Scaling volume for AXPW should be successful when, not if, needed.
    18 Oct 2012, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • I don't have the technical ability to follow daily trading, and I think watching daily trading can drive you to the nuthouse !


    However, there are a variety of good opinions regarding as to whether the big sellers have dried up or not.


    I believe that we were all hoping with this recent heavy trading volume that the inflection supply and demand point would be reached, and we would start the steady upward climb ?


    so my question is, do you think we are finally knocking on that door ?
    18 Oct 2012, 02:47 PM Reply Like
  • JR: JP has some charts that show the 10-day crossing the 50-day and that has been a reliable and positive indicator in the past.


    My own thoughts, based on severely incomplete information and lots of attempts at supposition, inference, SWAGs, ... suggests we should be there.


    But it's been that was for at least a couple months now and we've not see a real surge yet.


    Some I think is "flippers" that bought during the 18 days under $0.30 taking advantage of the 8 consecutive days trying to break through $0.33. Some I think is just normal market-makers whipping us around so they can make more moolah.


    Wtb and others have suggested no big steady move until some significant news is released.


    They might be right - I'm just tracking and using my experimental stuff to learn what I can while I can and am mostly concerned with near-term for now.


    18 Oct 2012, 03:05 PM Reply Like
  • "I believe that we were all hoping with this recent heavy trading volume that the inflection supply and demand point would be reached, and we would start the steady upward climb ?


    so my question is, do you think we are finally knocking on that door ? "


    As JP has indicated, tools available to address the issue are blunt instruments at best. That said, I believe we are very, very close to the door if not already knocking loudly. Let the NS-AAA move about under its own power in public view or a positive sales development occur and today's share prices will disappear as fast as Felix Baumgartner descended toward earth. IMO.
    18 Oct 2012, 02:59 PM Reply Like
  • Just a reminder.


    FullPower, Inc. Announces Speakers for Third Annual Advanced Energy Solutions 2012 Conference


    Last Chance to Sponsor, Register for AES2012 in San Diego from October 23 to October 25, 2012

    18 Oct 2012, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • So, yesterday I sent this email to Viridity:




    I read your website, with much interest, from time to time. I have noticed there are no recent articles, despite some recent events of importance, such as PJM's implementation of FERC Order 755 on October 1st, and battery-maker developments.


    I was wondering what you guys think of the recent events?




    Talk about fast response times (ha). Their website now has this:



    "PJM Performance Based Regulation Implemented as of October 1, 2012.


    Early results suggest lucrative opportunities for batteries and other fast responding resources."


    which includes:


    "Early results from the new compensation rules are encouraging. Over the first two weeks of October, the average total price for regulation (reflecting both capability and performance) is about triple what it had been in the last week of September. Traditional resources have performed at levels as low as 40%, while batteries and other fast-responding resources have performed at levels as high as 98%. The combination of the higher price and the higher performance is making it much more rewarding for fast-responding resources to provide regulation service to PJM. The new rules have been in place for a very short time, so Viridity will keep close watch on prices and performance over time and will provide updates."


    Among other things, IIRC (and I might not be--need some help from any experts here), TG mentioned in the last conf call that experts had told the company that they expected at least 150%, and probably more like 200% price increases for regulation. It's really early, but 300% so far is a positive surprise. And I think TG (or was just put together in my head) said or implied that even only 150% is good enough.
    18 Oct 2012, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • Oh MrI! That's great news and great initiative you took.


    Thanks for that.


    18 Oct 2012, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks HTL. Maybe my email made a difference, but either way, really like what they wrote, and I really look forward to what TG has to say in a month. Oh, and any PC orders would rock the house, but that may take a lot more performance history. Great to see that the early results are very encouraging. Go get'm Vani!


    Oh, and the FINRA shorts for today were 135,400 out of 563,350 total shares traded, which = 24.0%.
    18 Oct 2012, 05:39 PM Reply Like
  • Math correction/clarification: triple implies a 200% price increase, not 300% (e.g., 100 to 300 is a tripling, which = (300-100)/100 = 200% increase. But, not sure if TG said he was hearing 1.5x to 2.0x, or 150% to 200% increase. Would have to relisten to the conf. call.
    18 Oct 2012, 06:02 PM Reply Like
  • Ditto that thanks.


    The relative performance disparity indicated by, "Traditional resources have performed at levels as low as 40%, while batteries and other fast-responding resources have performed at levels as high as 98%" suggests a frequency response regulation premium of something on the order of 2.5X is warranted on that factor alone. IINM, earlier APC discussion of frequency regulation noted that the longer a power frequency deviation prevailed the more power and time required to correct it. ITMC, something more than 2.5X is warranted.


    I don't remember TG talking about FR premiums in the last conference call, but do share your memory of his mentioning 150% power price premium for FR in a conference call. I thought it was last November or early this year.
    18 Oct 2012, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv---I relistened to the Q2 conf call, and the pay for performance discussion begins at 32:52 (thanks to wtb again for asking the FERC questions--those questions begin at 31:30). My transcription of TG's reply:


    "So we expect that the compensation for that [faster response time to the signal] will increase dramatically. What does that mean? It means that we’ve been told by some people that it will be 150%, we’ve been told by others that it will be 200%. Whatever it is, we’ve not heard a number less than 150. Whatever it is, it will be more than what they are paying for right now."


    I fit another piece of the puzzle while listening to the FERC discussion. TG calls PJM a utility at 32:41. Now the Letter to Shareholders comment, "We are building on this first Cube in continued dialog with several utilities." makes more sense to me. I was originally confused, thinking of the traditional definition of utilities, meaning, say, Consolidated Edison or Exelon. Which to me means slow as hel1. But by including PJM and the like in his definition of utilities, that sounds like a lot faster time to sale to me.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:30 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks, Mr I. Must have fallen asleep or something while listening to the cc earlier. And could have been confused as to when I heard TG remarks on the subject.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:45 PM Reply Like
  • MI


    Great job!
    Even though AXPW is in it's productive infancy, hopefully their PR folks will continue with these anecdote announcements, especially as the clock ticks toward 1Q13 and their capital needs.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:26 AM Reply Like
  • Looks like Viridity uploaded this brochure as well

    22 Oct 2012, 11:52 PM Reply Like
  • Saw a Mr. Dakake is contact point for program. When googled his name along with Viridity, came up with presentation which has marketing of demand response to data centers within the presentation. Begins page 17 his part of presentation.



    And for the true stalker there is more bio info available on the internet as well as twitter and facebook. Just can't bring myself to link it though. I feel like a pervert already, but guess I'm not the one who put it in the public domain. It is kind of like someone disrobing in the middle of the street and then you aren't supposed to look. Dog was thirsty and needed a drink so up at 5 a.m.
    23 Oct 2012, 12:50 AM Reply Like
  • Sounds like Viridity.


    GELI’s battery operating system is here



    Darn, Wrong Axion! :(

    18 Oct 2012, 04:36 PM Reply Like
  • John, An advertising piece as a follow on to your presentation posted today. Proposing EFB for SS. This article is from the co. that got the BMW 3 series biz in South Africa.


    Let car batteries be the least of your worries


    "Enhanced Flooded Batteries (EFB) were designed for micro hybrid start/stop vehicles, without regenerative braking."

    18 Oct 2012, 04:54 PM Reply Like
  • And they have a guarantee for a full one year!:



Guarantee – The Enhanced Flooded Battery range carries a 12 month nationwide guarantee and is available in a range of sizes suitable for most vehicles in need of a replacement battery."
    18 Oct 2012, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • Poul, They are really sticking their neck out there and risking it all with that warranty!
    18 Oct 2012, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • A one year guarantee? Wow - that's a great offer. (sarcastic wow) Of course they may prorate the guarantee for the number of months actually in service.
    18 Oct 2012, 05:58 PM Reply Like
  • And I bet in that particular year service guys would only recharge the battery to fullness and dismiss disgruntled car owners who would turn off S/S function when that warranty expires.
    18 Oct 2012, 10:49 PM Reply Like
  • Obama Admin. Department of Energy subsidies to "Green Energy" Co.s
    18 Oct 2012, 05:20 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv: Though JCI doesn't belong on that list, it's the (wildly long) list I was looking for two days ago and couldn't find. Thanks!

    18 Oct 2012, 06:02 PM Reply Like
  • "Though JCI doesn't belong on that list, it's the (wildly long) list I was looking for two days ago and couldn't find."


    :-) Knowing your interest is why I posted the reference, Maya. It would be interesting to discover why JCI is included (#17 on the list) since that inclusion appears inconsistent with, "So far, 36 companies that have received federal support from taxpayers have either gone bankrupt or are laying off workers and are heading for bankruptcy." Might be a simple mistake or it might have acquired a company that is not listed (or should not be listed along with JCI).
    18 Oct 2012, 06:23 PM Reply Like
  • The problem I have with articles such as the one you link to, is that the article claims that:
    quote:: The problem begins with the issue of government picking winners and losers in the first place. Venture capitalist firms exist for this very reason, and they choose what to invest in by looking at companies’ business models and deciding if they are worthy :: unquote
    I guess no company ever went bankrupt after a venture capitalist loaned it money. They always succeed. (sarcasm)


    Well, all the money for these green companies didn't just come from the government. So where did the rest of the money come from? In each case, didn't people outside the government put in their own money and labor to try to build a company? Yes, they reached out to the government teat, but they are hardly the only businesses that do so. These companies couldn't make it, but I'm sure other companies have gone bankrupt that didn't get money from the Obama administration. Companies like Contec Holdings, GST Steel, K B Toys ring any bells?


    Lot's of companies have ideas, start up and file bankruptcy without help from the Obama administration. That's the nature of capitalism, hence the term entrepreneurial risk. Perhaps the market is a better mechanism for picking winners and losers; and having the government pick winners and losers often leads to suboptimal results, and sometimes cronyism. But all of this did not start with Obama. Were there not ethanol subsidies long before he became president? I guess it feels so good to bash O for wasting money on this, so I'll make a deal with you. I totaled the losses from the article you linked. They amount to $7.748 billion. When the people who voted for the previous administration pay back all the money that guy wasted invading Iraq, then the people who voted for this administration will find $8 billion to make up for the green energy mistakes. Fair?
    18 Oct 2012, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv: I'd take a wager the writer never double-checked the list; probably is unaware of JCI all together. For what ever this means, there were companies on that list I have never heard of, either.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:10 PM Reply Like
  • " I guess it feels so good to bash O for wasting money on this, so I'll make a deal with you. I totaled the losses from the article you linked. They amount to $7.748 billion. When the people who voted for the previous administration pay back all the money that guy wasted invading Iraq, then the people who voted for this administration will find $8 billion to make up for the green energy mistakes. Fair? "


    :-) I see nothing "fair" or balanced about taking objection to criticism of O "for wasting money like this" and then ask only "the people who voted for the previous administration to pay back all the money that guy wasted in Iraq." A lot of Democrats in both Senate and House voted for Iraq funding. For a look at Congressional representation during those years see
    18 Oct 2012, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • >D-inv ... Similar to the fact that the "green" spending that is going belly up right now was started under a Republican Prez by a Repub majority Congress in 2005. Our famous rebate on EV's was the brainchild of a Repub VP. I could go on ... and on ... and ON but there is little point. Y'all are convinced of the one-sidedness of your views being Oh! so correct. I just wish ya'll could see the f-ups of your favorite team and react with such vigor, but I dream. Some will weasel by saying they do.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • I see nothing "fair" or balanced about taking objection to criticism of O::


    There's a lot of folks trying to make political hay out of this issue of late. I think a reasonable person could have doubts that your post was objective criticism, especially if they have read some of the posts you have made in PQC
    18 Oct 2012, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • " I think a reasonable person could have doubts that your post was objective criticism, especially if they have read some of the posts you have made in PQC "


    :-) It certainly was no less objective than either of your comments. And with that I suggest taking any further exchange on the subject to the Political Quick Chat board(s).
    18 Oct 2012, 07:49 PM Reply Like
  • " I could go on ... and on ... and ON but there is little point. Y'all are convinced of the one-sidedness of your views being Oh! so correct."


    :-) Actually, DR, I believe boondoggles are boondoggles regardless of the political sponsorship. And, as a point of interest for you perhaps, until the 2010 election I had never voted a straight ticket and was so disgusted with general election choices on both sides of the political isle in 2000 I decided the most responsible thing I could do was to not vote at all.


    Political Quick Chat 3 is here:
    18 Oct 2012, 09:19 PM Reply Like
  • >D-inv ... Thanks, but I'll pass. I don't have the patience to debate talking points, blame & victimhood. I do that enough daily.
    18 Oct 2012, 10:06 PM Reply Like
  • The column total is $10.2 billion.


    I'm not entirely sure whether JCI belongs on the list or not. An analyst from Paris that I get news from recently had this to say:


    "JCI’s Federal funds went for its Michigan lithium factory, built when it was in a JV with SAFT (a hugely loss-making venture that SAFT elegantly exited). SAFT continues to build batteries for JCI for the Mercedes and BMW hybrids, until the end of the year. Later, JCI partnered to sell Hitachi-built lithium hybrid batteries to GM for the Buick LaCrosse; Hitachi went on to extend that contract for the Chevy Malibu, apparently without JCI. To our knowledge JCI’s own factory is idle; so now it has a total of five hugely loss-making lithium factories with no volume lithium–making experience.


    JCI is a relatively rich company with other profitable activities, so at least the factories will be running for a while. JCI promised $72.5m in immediate financing and acquired A123’s customer contracts. In the immediate term, these are Fisker and Smith Electric (which had recently switched over to A123 from Valence which is also recovering from bankruptcy). Since neither of these report publicly and JCI is quite obscure about its lithium activities in its filings, it may be a while before we see insightful numbers about the EV industry from this galaxy."
    19 Oct 2012, 01:57 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks, JP!
    In addition to the OEM’s your analyst cited, A123 provides energy storage to several well-known truck and bus manufacturers, including the Volvo Group, Navistar, and all of the North American transit bus OEM’s.
    I wonder, Is this commercial vehicle business included in the “automotive business” that JCI is buying?
    19 Oct 2012, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • I'd expect JCI to get anything that rolls, but until more is disclosed it's only an educated guess.
    19 Oct 2012, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • John


    "To our knowledge JCI’s own factory is idle; so now it has a total of five hugely loss-making lithium factories with no volume lithium–making experience."


    Should be interesting.
    A game of political chess, or does JCI want "...five hugely loss-making lithium factories..."?


    Bidding War for A123 Brews in Bankruptcy Court
    19 Oct 2012, 11:37 AM Reply Like
  • If A123 was a simple business bankruptcy one might guess at motivations and likely outcomes. With the obvious political ramifications, there's no way to tell what's going on behind the curtain. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that somebody with serious stroke wants to keep A123 in domestic hands, or at least out of Chinese hands. JCI could also covet A123's technology, although that prospect strikes me as more remote. About the only conclusion I feel confident with at this point is that there won't be anything left for the stockholders because there never is.
    19 Oct 2012, 12:06 PM Reply Like
  • "If A123 was a simple business bankruptcy one might guess at motivations and likely outcomes. With the obvious political ramifications, there's no way to tell what's going on behind the curtain."


    Is there a corporate tax shelter component to these bankruptcies, JP? Seems to me if a viable corp. acquires a loss riddled company or company subsidiary there could be an "asset" available to the acquirer in the form of deductible losses and loss carryovers. Anyone know the tax code on the issue?
    19 Oct 2012, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • I don't think JCI will get any carry-forward tax benefits because those things typically disappear in bankruptcy, but it's been a very long time since I did any significant tax work.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:55 PM Reply Like
  • jpau: Totally fair. I don't care which party is in power, or who has been president, or who could have been president, from George McGovern, to Harrold Stassen, to Al Gore, to Pat Paulsen, I'm not a fan of any energy policy from any administration since the early 70s.


    What I do like is anyone who attempts to track government waste. But hey, we're only $16T in debt, so I guess $7.748B of waste is a flea on a hippo's arse.


    Good points across the board.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:03 PM Reply Like
  • Pat Paulsen was awesome, thank you for reminding me of him!
    18 Oct 2012, 07:58 PM Reply Like
  • "quote:: The problem begins with the issue of government picking winners and losers in the first place. Venture capitalist firms exist for this very reason, and they choose what to invest in by looking at companies’ business models and deciding if they are worthy :: unquote
    I guess no company ever went bankrupt after a venture capitalist loaned it money. They always succeed. (sarcasm)"


    Business failures are quite common and more startup businesses fail than succeed. The problem with government "picking winners and losers" is that government funding is it ALWAYS entails involuntary participation by some taxpayers.


    Private sector capitalization of startups is voluntary and undertaken by people who are willing to undertake the inherent risks intoto. Whether the investors fully comprehend the risks they undertake or not and whether they are truly qualified to assess business models and potential markets, it is their money placed at risk. When the government "invests" in venture firms it is placing taxpayer resources at risk and obligating all taxpayers to foot the bill whether they want to or not.


    IMO, venture capitalism is NOT an appropriate function of government.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:06 PM Reply Like
  • Thank you D-Inv.


    That "voluntary" thing is often ignored - not important to those that "believe" I guess - and then unrelated stuff like wars are dragged in to distract from the original argument.


    Come to think of it, wars might be a perfect example where our "choosing winners and losers" is best demonstrated with an abysmal record over generations.


    18 Oct 2012, 07:19 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv, what you say about government expenditure is true, there is always involuntary participation by some taxpayers. That's democracy (ok, the U.S. is a federal constitutional republic), but the point is some voters lose. Sometimes me, sometimes you.


    So if a person only wants the government to spend things on stuff they approve of, the U.S. probably isn't going to work out for them.


    There are lots of government subsidies out there: agriculture, gas and oil, nuclear, auto, battery companies, green jobs, airline bailouts, bank bailouts, etc. If it's your position that they should all go away, I can respect that. I only hope that you understand that not all voters feel that way, and sometimes the voters who believe in subsidies have a majority. But I guess even those voters probably believe some of the subsidies are just wasteful.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • "D-inv, what you say about government expenditure is true, there is always involuntary participation by some taxpayers. "


    I suggest again, take your discussion to the Political Quick Chat board.
    18 Oct 2012, 08:51 PM Reply Like
  • Smart guy! I vote we get rid of Sec. Chu and put him in his place.


    Ignoring 'Fantastic Opportunity' of Gas Is Foolish: Lomborg

    18 Oct 2012, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • Energy Secretary Petersen has a nice ring to it.
    18 Oct 2012, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • How about Energy Secretary Not Sure?


    note: this has nothing to do with JP, it's a reference that Mike Judge fans will get
    18 Oct 2012, 09:22 PM Reply Like
  • "If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve."


    William Tecumseh Sherman


    "I'd rather be a WalMart greeter. The pay's about the same and there's a lot less hassle."


    John Petersen
    19 Oct 2012, 02:02 AM Reply Like
  • Q: "Sir, what will you do if you win the election?"


    A: "Demand a recount."
    19 Oct 2012, 02:11 AM Reply Like
  • I have said several times that I am not a fan of any political discussion on the Axion site " that disparages the office of the President of the United States", no matter which party is in control.


    I appreciate that this close to an election these commentators have actually checked in their bias and made and effort to stick to government policy as the debate. My view is that government should not waste. It is impossible to spend a Trillion dollars and not waste.
    Even at my house we find that we waste a small percentage of our budget. I would just remind folks that I did not mind the grant to Exide with Axion. I don't mind the GM/ Axion grant. I don't mind the NS railroad/ electric train and OTR locomotive grant.


    If anyone truly objects to government funding of industry they should, as a matter of principal, sell all stocks. Somewhere, someplace they have been effected by these grants.


    We are competing with China that subsidizes all industries. The world is not what is was. It is a new world marketplace and government does play a role. Whether you like it or not. We, as a country can not shy away from the truth.
    18 Oct 2012, 10:30 PM Reply Like
  • You make good points, futurist. The reason china kicked our collective butt on solar panels is because their government flooded the industry by subsidizind overcapacity.


    Also, I like to think of government involvement in energy as a national security issue. If you have a Trillion dollars to spend, will America be more secure and more lives be made better by funding another year of war against the Taliban, or would it be better served by subsidizing energy storage, source diversity, and a more reliable grid?
    19 Oct 2012, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • "If anyone truly objects to government funding of industry they should, as a matter of principal, sell all stocks. Somewhere, someplace they have been effected by these grants."


    :-) If one has a perfect spouse except for incredibly cold feet in Winter a predilection on their part to use one as a foot warmer, should they as a matter of principle demand a divorce? It might help to consider an axiom -- "the perfect is the enemy of the good."


    I find the federal grants involving Axion quite undesirable and barely tolerable only because they in a small way reduce the relative magnitude of very large subsidies extended to more politically favored energy storage technologies and companies.
    18 Oct 2012, 11:11 PM Reply Like
  • Well I'd written this earlier and was wishing to dump it but...


    I find it interesting how some Americans can still be so passionate about one of the two political parties given each has had various levels of control over the last 20-30 years and we can all see where we've been lead to by our "leadership".


    I was thinking about this when I went to the deep discount hardware store and paid 6 USD for a pound for 3" drywall screws. Wanted to get some of the screwing around the house done myself so it doesn't seem foreign to me when we get the fruits of our labor that's a coming like an Axion inside loco.


    I myself am wishing for the day when Americans get the right to vote nyet.


    OK that's my OT political contribution.


    I'll let you guys go back to bragging about how well you're all represented.
    19 Oct 2012, 12:37 AM Reply Like
  • IIRC Art Buchwald once suggested that every ballot should have a third choice for "None of the Above." I try to stay apolitical but wonder if George Wallace didn't have a point when he observed there isn't "a dime's worth of difference" between the two.
    19 Oct 2012, 02:12 AM Reply Like
  • We Libertarians always lose. Always. And we view the Republicrats and Demicans as essentially interchangeable. The more they screech and claw at one another, and the louder the volume of their disagreement, the closer they become in actual outcome.


    My personal explanatory tale goes:


    Both the Republicans and Democrats will sell their souls to get control of the train. And both have labored for decades to lay track to the same destination. The major difference between the two groups is that the Democrats drive faster than the Republicans.


    But still, we Libertarians and other third parties are just a rounding error in the election returns.


    The voters who cast ballots for either of the two major parties cannot be disassociated from the results which flow from their selections.
    19 Oct 2012, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco,
    Your drywall efforts remind me of Camilo Jose Cela's explanation in court about the difference between dormido and durmiendo.
    19 Oct 2012, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • I prefer to think of my self as an anarchocapitalist but why quibble.
    19 Oct 2012, 08:58 AM Reply Like
  • There's a great South Park episode where, as a goof, the boys want to change the school mascot to something offensive. But they can't agree on which of 2 options to rally behind so the school has a special election to decide.


    In the end, one of the kids makes one of those specific statements that is also universally true when he asks "why is our only choice between a turd sandwich and a giant douche?".


    19 Oct 2012, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • Metro. :)

    19 Oct 2012, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco,
    Nice to see you understand, if the politicians lead us into a greater crisis I will be more "dormido" that "durmiendo".
    19 Oct 2012, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • "The voters who cast ballots for either of the two major parties cannot be disassociated from the results which flow from their selections. "


    :-) I believe that applies to all voters whether the vote is cast for a major or minor party candidate or even a write-in.
    19 Oct 2012, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • Wanxiang Group intends to outbid Johnson Controls

    19 Oct 2012, 06:27 AM Reply Like
  • I always loved the Circus.
    19 Oct 2012, 08:58 AM Reply Like
  • Don't remember if this was posted about Valeo's electric supercharger.
    19 Oct 2012, 07:09 AM Reply Like
  • In another article about Valeo,



    I now read and recall that Valeo purchased CPT's electric supercharger business (the ALABC passat had the CPT electric supercharger). Additionally the article states that:


    Using third-party forecasts, Valeo planners expect that the number of twin- and 3-cylinder engines in the European market will jump from 900,000 units in 2011 to 5 million in 2019 with specific power increasing from 47 kW/L to 63 kW/L.


    “It also means 60% of the 2- and 3-cylinder engines in 2019 in Europe will be turbocharged or supercharged compared to 20% in 2011,” said Strohl.


    I would be pleased if PbC got a nice hunk of this market to compliment the electric supercharger and start-stop.
    19 Oct 2012, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • That electric supercharger is a big power draw for a few seconds. They sure don't want to run it from a battery with poor DCA.
    19 Oct 2012, 09:19 AM Reply Like
  • Metro et al: Here's what has me stumped. It takes electricity to drive the supercharger. We, presumably, would have a PbC on-board and a starter-generator of some substantial power in order to recharge quickly, regardless of regenerative braking. ISTM that the electric supercharger could be eliminated and replaced with an appropriately-sized SGM that helps accelerate the vehicle while the turbo(s) spool up. From personal experience, spool up takes at most a couple of seconds (and this was with older larger single units, not the possible micro-twin units available now).


    Result: less complexity, expense, weight (maybe?) and greater efficiency as the motor is a very-high efficiency unit while any type of charger compressing air has a lower efficiency. The *only* downside I can imagine is that with less air being pumped into the engine, the turbo(s) spool up slightly slower. But that's more than offset, ISTM, because less fuel is used (excess fuel is generally injected into turbo engines during boost phases to provide additional temporary cooling of the parts exposed to combustion processes).


    What in the world am I missing here, other than the fact that a company has produced a prototype that is working? ISTM that an appropriate SGM with a PbC would be a much better solution.


    This has been bugging me ever since we first saw the article.


    19 Oct 2012, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • The starter generator that CPT used on the LC SuperHybrid was 2,000 watts, or about 2 hp. The electric supercharger adds a lot more boost for the buck than an electric drive motor could, particularly when you consider the length of time it operates.
    19 Oct 2012, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks John.


    19 Oct 2012, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • Valeo i-StARS and ReStart Innovations Offer Affordable Hybrid Solutions for Internal Combustion Engines

    19 Oct 2012, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • This would be much improved over the start-stop system I've been driving where the engine only stops when the car is stopped and in neutral and the 400 milliseconds is less than my car takes time to burp and backfire before accelerating.
    "For example, one Valeo application example in the market today stops the engine when the vehicle speed drops below five miles per hour (eight km/h) for automatic transmissions and below 13 miles per hour (20 km/h) for manual transmissions. i-StARS automatically restarts the engine in approximately 400 milliseconds, even when drivers unexpectedly change their minds during stopping sequences."


    With relation to backfiring: I remember my brother discovered a sequence on one of our farm trucks where if one was traveling at about 50 mph and then turned the key off and let the vehicle deaccelerate for about five seconds and then turned the key back on, that the truck would give a backfire that sounded like a gunshot. It was all good until he blew a hole in the muffler. Dad wasn't very happy.
    19 Oct 2012, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • "For example, one Valeo application example in the market today stops the engine when the vehicle speed drops below five miles per hour (eight km/h) for automatic transmissions and below 13 miles per hour (20 km/h) for manual transmissions. i-StARS automatically restarts the engine in approximately 400 milliseconds, even when drivers unexpectedly change their minds during stopping sequences."


    That description strikes me as not a very good plan for several stop and go, nearly freeway parking lot experiences I have "enjoyed." Particularly the < than 13 mph for manual transmissions. Then, I am one of those drivers that prefers to keep a vehicle moving slowly rather than go/stop, go/stop when it is apparent no one is going very far anytime soon (and I drive a 5-speed manual vehicle most of the time).
    19 Oct 2012, 06:54 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv. Understood and that might be the right way to manage your machine if your engine is going to remain on. If you have the ability to stop the engine for a period and then move forward that may be better for reduced fuel consumption.


    In situations where you want to creep you can turn off SS.
    19 Oct 2012, 07:18 PM Reply Like
  • I would expect that SS won't always have a kill switch if the vehicle is to get a mileage/emissions preference from regulatory bodies. I do understand that many of the early (perhaps present) European models have this option. As the regulators are still negotiating the benefits and application to fuel/emissions standards we will have to wait and see if my theory holds.
    21 Oct 2012, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1, I'm with you all the way on your thoughts here. If, in the US, automakers are to get recognition for the efficiencies delivered by SS I expect that the override switch will need to be removed. Also the systems will have to be far more robust and perhaps even verified to function at some cycle like emissions in many US states.


    And, in my opinion, this is what the Europeans should have done. At least they should have required that the systems be far more robust than they are.


    PS Haven't seen you around in awhile. Hope all is well with you and yours.
    21 Oct 2012, 02:31 PM Reply Like
  • I think they will all have to evolve up the hybrid scale and away from only pure SS in order to justify the increased cost of the required battery. EFB and AGM are just not equal to the task. Any battery that is will cost some amount more, and thus will require more achieved fuel savings in order to justify the battery cost, which ISTM will force the automakers to incorporate such things as sailing, brake energy recuperation, etc much more widely... Basic SS may survive in the very low end of the market, but it's hard to see how anyone; consumers, automakers, or regulators, is going to be very happy with it as long as it involves low-end batteries...
    21 Oct 2012, 02:49 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: More importantly, IMO, the city driving cycle needs to be updated to reflect true city patterns and correctly project the potential savings. This way the auto makers can actually get some benefit from the expense of s/s.


    It would also let the EPA see the *actual* potential in reduced fuel and pollutants.


    I would like to see routes for heavily urbanized areas as well as more "normal" ones with less traffic congestion.


    21 Oct 2012, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • 48, I agree with your perspective here. For me your "very low end of the market" is low mass small engine city cars. These cars are already getting great gas mileage when moving and if you add regen and SS to the equation you reduce significantly the aspect of the city driving cycle that makes them far less efficient.
    21 Oct 2012, 04:09 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, Agreed. But we shouldn't expect regulators to afford the efficiency of the tech. to be attributable to the technology if it is not robust and working under most circumstances.
    21 Oct 2012, 04:11 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: ISTM that they set regulatory goals that aren't yet achievable all the time. That's why they have time lines that stretch out several years for fuel economy, emissions reductions, etc.


    So, ISTM that setting 1) firstly, a testing protocol that more closely emulates real city driving and 2) secondly, a time line for auto makers to meet improvements using that updated protocol wouldn't be breaking their behavior pattern.


    It's up to the auto makers to determine if s/s is one of the anticipated components in the solutions and then, as we've discussed before, have inspection procedures commensurate with other fuel and pollution control equipment.


    If they put out s/s and it ceases to work as necessary (note I did not say designed), the the auto makers should be subject to actions just as with any other failure of pollution or fuel consumption improvement procedures.


    21 Oct 2012, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, All true. And they in fact work together to decide what is achievable over time and how to test and regulate accordingly.


    My issue is that the automakers know that base SS today as it is implemented will not function in far too many areas and drive cycles to either achieve what they sold to the government or what they sold to the consumer. Remember how long they test these systems before they are put in production. This is wrong and it's wasteful.


    If it's not ready delay the regulation and the claimed savings. Makes not sense to only get a small level of the claimed savings, add to the lead recycling frequency and upset the customers that have reason to care. Far too many other areas where they could spend the money today and do better. MHO
    21 Oct 2012, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • "ISTM that they set regulatory goals that aren't yet achievable all the time. That's why they have time lines that stretch out several years for fuel economy, emissions reductions, etc."


    That may certainly be the case at times, but it has been suggested a different approach to business by the companies might, in several instances, enable compliance on significantly short timelines.


    Union of Concerned Scientists is not my favorite organization for several reasons, but one of their efforts demonstrated the point that technology existed at the time to meet emissions/fuel mileage standards set for multiple years forward. They did so by modifying a vehicle marketed by one manufacturer to use some parts and/or systems other manufacturers were using in their own vehicle models. The "concerned scientists", though, only demonstrated technical feasibility and abstracted from mundane economic issues such as recovery of intellectual property costs, manufacturing capacity constraints, etc.
    21 Oct 2012, 05:30 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco,
    I'm not sure the Europeans really had many alternatives given their substantial head start in the SS evolution (at least the first few years). I also think that the European experience has dramatically undermined the U.S. implementation strategy, as regards the regulators acceptance of SS.
    All the stats I have seen regarding the benefits of SS are somewhat hazy at best. 3% to 18% mileage benefits are espoused but seldom defined. Are these numbers simply attributable to engine off periods at stops or coasting, and what of the cumulative benefits that come with electric power steering pumps rather than fuel sucking friction losses of a belt drive, the automatic transmissions that will shift to neutral when coasting or at stops without losing the smoothness at reengaging after stopping (another waste of power). These and several other changes needed for SS are themselves efficiency 'improvers' (sp), but without numbers describing their benefits individually or cumulatively. These new systems also bring new challenges for the battery that seemingly further the AXION's PbC case/cause.
    Back to the European experience and the initial U.S. implementation of SS with other batteries, FLA, enhanced FLA, AGM, enhanced AGM, spiral wound AGM, Supercaps..., I believe one reason the auto OEM's have been hesitant to adopt the PbC is that until they do they can claim they are using the best available battery tech. If what we believe is true about the capabilities of the PbC and this battery is utilized by an automaker then all OEM's will lose the "best available battery tech." argument! Not a conspiracy, just a business strategy.


    On the personal side I/we are well, thank you!, I am still lurking religiously, and finishing summer projects before the snows hit!
    23 Oct 2012, 12:13 AM Reply Like
  • 42itus1, Agree with your perspective.


    I guess my only point is if the tech isn't ready keep working on it until it makes sense. I can see no value to society yet in the installation of the lower end systems with LAB's if in fact the SS function is as inactive as it appears due to the many weaknesses of the energy storage system being applied.


    Snow. I like it for awhile but in Rochester NY it just hangs on for too long.
    23 Oct 2012, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • metro, a technical point; electronic fuel injection allows the car computer to turn off the fuel when the ignition is shut off. Hence, no fuel accumulation and no backfire.
    30 Oct 2012, 01:11 AM Reply Like
  • Maybe my next car will be that technologically advanced. My last car still had a manual choke on it. Still can't get used to driving a car that doesn't have a three speed on the column.
    30 Oct 2012, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • If you're still driving a 2CV want to hold onto that beauty - they're collectors items – http://bit.lynIjJstCitroën_2CV


    The Cadillac of France.
    30 Oct 2012, 02:27 PM Reply Like
  • My last car was a 1992 Renault Clio 1.0, and had a manual choke. I drive them till they drop. It had a four speed manual and imagine my surprise to see that other cars had 5 speeds.


    For a while we had my grandfather's old '58 Ford Fairlane with a 3 speed on the column - at the time I drove it, it was something less than fashionable.


    Also had a '53 Chevy pickup with a 3 speed on the column and a governor that wouldn't let it exceed 50 mph. My dad let my brother drive it in the late 60's. It was either that or walk to town which was 20 miles. I can imagine it was a real chick magnet for him.
    30 Oct 2012, 03:03 PM Reply Like
  • I know the feeling. I've got a '98 Audi A6 with 150,000 km on it that runs like a top. At this rate I may be able to use it as a coffin.
    30 Oct 2012, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • Driving vehicles like that, you might consider changing your handle to retromeanderthal.
    30 Oct 2012, 08:10 PM Reply Like
  • Now that's a gold star play on words.
    31 Oct 2012, 02:12 AM Reply Like
  • SMaturin: LoL and groan simultaneously.


    Great one!


    I especially like the way "meander" fit in there.


    31 Oct 2012, 06:24 AM Reply Like
  • the "meander" went right over the low sloping forehead; second time this week.
    31 Oct 2012, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • Isn't the last line interesting?


    " It can also work on 12V and 24V systems and is now being developed to work on 48V systems as well."


    This 48v electrical system just keeps coming up over and over again. Where will the battery come from that can handle the load? :-)
    19 Oct 2012, 07:34 AM Reply Like
  • 10/18/2012: (AXPW) EOD stuff partially copied from instablog.
    # Trds: 68, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 81250 Vol 563893, AvTrSz: 8293
    Min. Pr: 0.2900, Max Pr: 0.3139, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3004
    # Buys, Shares: 45 230743, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.2996
    # Sells, Shares: 23 333150, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3009
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:1.44 (40.92% “buys”), DlyShts 135400 (24%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 40.64%


    A small AH trade of 543 shares at $0.3019 is not included in the FINRA data. Adding this to the day's volume moves the short percentage to 24% from 24.03%. If we add it to shorts too, the percentage becomes 24.11%.


    The big deal today was the early-morning action pushing price as low as $0.29. Reference the comment copied below ...


    Buy:sell made a very nice recovery to more normal range after the market-makers completed their dirty deeds. Notice that the first push down might have allowed them to cover short sales for yesterday (~300.5K) at a near-2 cent profit and by the end of the mornings dealings (11:33) they could cover the last three day's shorts (~398K) at an aggregate VWAP of $0.3181 might have a profit margin around ~$0.014.


    That does not include fees from the exchanges for the trades.


    Last thing on short percentages: usual bouncing and today happened to finish quite near the long-term averages and the rising trend line: 24%, 21.02%, 23.60%, and 26.99% for my usual 10, 25, 50 and 100-day periods. I'll iterate that in the recent past the huge percentage spikes have appeared after high-volume days, such as yesterday's. I can't say the pattern will repeat (maybe the big sellers really are out and the patterns will change?) but I won't be surprised if we see it Friday or Monday.


    Here's the APC comments from earlier today. After them, the normal daily commentary appears.


    (AXPW): notes on the early action (through 11:33).


    Yesterday's short volume 300576, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3219.


    09:30 – 11:11 min $0.2995, max $0.3139, VWAP $0.3027, volume 307,950 shares traded, AvTrSz: 17500, and 21 trades had been done with a buy:sell of 1:13.59 (5.7% “buys”).


    So, potentially, all of yesterday's short sales could have been covered at a near 2 cents profit. And all this likely induced some additional "panic" selling.


    Immediately thereafter, a few trades went at $0.30. And then the pressure continued, but the buying improved big-time - my guess MMs taking advantage in an "accumulation phase".


    Through 11:24, min $0.2955, max $0.3139, 30 trades VWAP $0.3023, average trade size 10,750, buy:sell 1:5.41 (15.6% “buys”). Note the big buy:sell improvement.


    Through 11:33 min. $0.2900, max $0.3139, VWAP $0.301, volume 394K, average trade size 6,355, 37 trades with buy:sell 1:4.13 (19.5% “buys”). Note the buy:sell continues to improve.


    Total short sales last three days ~397.88.


    Trading then went dead. MMs accomplished their goals.


    Bid/ask currently TEJS 5K $0.2905, BTIG ask 5K $0.295.




    No comment on volume – need to let it settle out a day or two. Shorts have been touched on above.


    The last two days have been sufficient to weaken both the 10-day and 25-day buy:sell ratio averages. This seems bearish when I look back over my experimental charts. Recent history has price falling when this condition exists.


    Average trade size continues to move to the higher ranges – trending above the averages and the long-term trend line. This is in conflict with the bearishness of the buy:sell. Is the apparent conflict just an effect of the last (hopefully!) “flippers” that bought during the 18 days under $0.30 exiting or an indication that the market-makers are in “accumulation mode” building a larger sale block for a good customer? Last time we had this particular combination (10 and 25 buy:sell averages starting a decline while average trade size strengthened) in mid-to-late March our price went from around $0.38 to $0.46 or so around 4/18. It took about a month though.


    I'm not going to discuss the inflection point calculations except to encourage you to look at them. As with everything using different periods, there's mixed signals. Some suggested this price weakness might be coming, others were still suggesting this would not happen yet ... and it may work out, after we understand enough, that relationship among the periods to each other is significant.


    On the traditional TA front, the 10/16 volatility I mentioned that suggested a change was in the works seems prescient ATM. We got as high as $0.34 yesterday (Wed.) and got as low as $0.29 today. Today closed barely below the 50-day SMA ($0.3035) and just above a very short-term rising support (~$0.30, which also happens to be a prior price-point support). I had added it Wednesday and it now spans only 7 days, including today.


    Volume dropped off today but I think it has more to go before we can start looking for a rise in price to appear on the horizon.


    The $0.33 resistance I was worried about has apparently won this round as we are, ATM, back in the descending channel after nine days of trying to move on above it. Couldn't get the job done. It's now at ~$0.315 and we stayed under it today.


    So the battle now becomes which is stronger – the falling longer-term resistance or the prior $0.30 support and short-term rising support.


    The "Dly Sht % of 'sells'" is omitted here.


    19 Oct 2012, 08:29 AM Reply Like
  • It may be time to remind new and old and readers that Axion has almost no debt. A123 and many of these other companies are failing because they gambled that revenue would ramp up fast enough to catch up with debt payments. Axion has a cash burn rate but could, if necessary, cut expenditures to the point of eliminating it. Of course this would remove some of the "irons in the fire" that need tending. The bank can't take your house if you don't have a mortgage.
    19 Oct 2012, 09:51 AM Reply Like
  • JohnM121,
    Thanks for happy thought of the day.
    19 Oct 2012, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • Small companies are like babies in sub-saharan Africa. They rarely die of starvation, but dysentery kills them by the millions.


    My two cardinal rules of small company finance are simple.


    First, take the money when it's available - even if it hurts.
    Second, never promise to pay the money back.


    The biggest catastrophes in my investing life came from companies that borrowed money without having adequate free cash flow to service the debt during an economic downturn. When a company is big enough to borrow money, it's too big to have me as a stockholder.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:05 AM Reply Like
    19 Oct 2012, 10:05 AM Reply Like
  • Above link is entitled "Current and Future Batteries" at nextbigfuture (sorry, description didn't post first time).
    19 Oct 2012, 10:33 AM Reply Like
  • Year of the electric car blows a fuse


    " By the end of 2012, most major automakers will have a plug-in car of some type on the market, but plug-in cars still make up just one tenth of one percent of all cars sold in America. So have automakers gotten ahead of themselves and produced too many?


    Promoters of electric cars say no. They acknowledge that while there are many types of electric cars out there, they're not available in enough places or in large enough numbers."



    For those that agree we need more EV's right away.

    19 Oct 2012, 10:22 AM Reply Like
  • My sleuth contribution for the day.


    I spent about an hour on the phone today with a business development manager of a Fortune 500 company that's interested in the carbon space. He told me that Kurray's supercapacitor carbons sell for $15,000 to $20,000 per ton in volume. I've sent a note asking what "volume" means and will update when I get a answer.
    19 Oct 2012, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • I definitely see an emerging market for it.......
    19 Oct 2012, 11:37 AM Reply Like
  • Couple of interesting tangential articles from Bloomberg:


    "First, France. There the Socialist government has proposed legislation that would home energy bills dependent on age, income, climate and conservation efforts. The law could impose a penalty of as much as 600 euros a year for energy-inefficient households. The proposed rules, called "Orwellian" by the opposition , have elicited a rancorous national debate."



    The second article is about Prius sales. Prius this year is the #1 selling car model in California. It's also been the #1 selling model in Japan for the past four years.

    19 Oct 2012, 12:23 PM Reply Like
  • The original Prius is an exceptionally strong model that singlehandedly accounts for 36% all US HEV sales. Collectively, Toyota hybrids account for 74% of all US HEV sales. The numbers are way impressive until you realize that HEVs only represent 3% of US car sales.
    19 Oct 2012, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • I guess when you read a cross section of the comments on the Altoona Facebook NS999 post you can kind of get a feel for why NSC wants to keep the NS999 program low key. Quite a broad view on the topic with a few not having the knowledge to even post an opinion anyway.

    19 Oct 2012, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • Nice to see WT there holding up the Axion end.
    19 Oct 2012, 01:08 PM Reply Like


    One hundred idiots make idiotic plans and carry them out. All but one justly fail. The hundredth idiot, whose plan succeeded through pure luck, is immediately convinced he's a genius.


    Iain M Banks - MATTER
    19 Oct 2012, 01:12 PM Reply Like
  • I love Banks' stories. This one I have on Kindle.


    The quote is the explanation of the name of a Culture Ship (autonomous advanced-AI huge space ships that give themselves ironic names). The ship explains that his name comes from an old proverb.


    The ship's name is "The Hundredth Idiot."


    Perhaps we should give that name to the next troll that pops up here.
    19 Oct 2012, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • I'm re-reading it now and just had to laugh when I hit that phrase.


    Another classic came out of the Algebraist where a character was not bound by "the vulgar exigencies of objective truth."
    19 Oct 2012, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • JP, that 100th idiot sounds just like me with my first year trading with a 60% gain followed by a second year "all-in" on Axion now over 70% underwater.
    19 Oct 2012, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • I think there are times when we all get to wear the 100th idiot hat.
    19 Oct 2012, 03:08 PM Reply Like
  • Never anyway of knowing, Bang. If Axion went up 4000%, you'd of been hailed as a genius!
    19 Oct 2012, 03:11 PM Reply Like
  • When Axion finally runs, we'll all be seen as geniuses. Some of us will have just been brilliant at a faster rate and cheaper price.
    19 Oct 2012, 03:32 PM Reply Like
  • Can't wait for that day. For now, I'll attempt to brush up on my technical analysis with highly educational videos like this one:

    19 Oct 2012, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • "When Axion finally runs, we'll all be seen as geniuses."


    And we can throw a "167 Idiots" party.
    19 Oct 2012, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • >dastar: Hey, it's Easy to Love! (ETL)
    19 Oct 2012, 04:12 PM Reply Like
  • Dastar,


    That gives new meaning to "teaching TA."
    19 Oct 2012, 04:18 PM Reply Like
  • I think I just had an inflection point!
    19 Oct 2012, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • Certainly easy to look at. For me, anything more would be a bit like a dog chasing a truck. What would I do if I caught one?
    19 Oct 2012, 04:22 PM Reply Like
  • Dastar: don't believe them that it's so simple. Look at AXPW stochastic, e.g., 9/11. Overbought and the %K crossed above %D. Look at price going forward from there and subsequent stochastic action.


    Notice that on 10/1 stochastic was *not* overbought but we had a much better price appreciation.


    19 Oct 2012, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,


    Sounds like you really want to get technical with her.
    19 Oct 2012, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • If I caught one of those trucks I would drive it at top speed until the wheels fell off. But that's just me - I'm goofy like that. :)


    19 Oct 2012, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • "I think there are times when we all get to wear the 100th idiot hat"


    Can I get mine "foil" plated ?
    (I'm not sure I believe in that conspiracy, Just want to play it safe)
    19 Oct 2012, 11:16 PM Reply Like


    Workers at the LG Chem battery plant keep themselves busy with grounds maintenance, card games and movies.



    An absolute MUST WATCH!
    19 Oct 2012, 01:21 PM Reply Like
  • Depressing!


    I'm withholding additional comment as it would invariably lead to political discussion.




    EDIT: CNBC just said they be doing a story on this in the next hour.
    19 Oct 2012, 01:38 PM Reply Like
  • >Anybody ... Is there anyway to repurpose the equipment on a Li-on assembly line? I have no idea because I've never seen the inside of a battery plant (or at least not in the last 20 years). I was just wondering if anything beside the material handling system had any other use.
    19 Oct 2012, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • Given the architecture and construction of a lithium-ion battery cell I have to believe the fabrication equipment is pretty specialized, but can't say anything for sure about alternative uses for the equipment.


    An architectural schematic from LG Chem is in this article.

    19 Oct 2012, 01:52 PM Reply Like
  • I classify this as Hipium withdrawls. Build a factory with someone else's money. Add agreements that money is linked only with the number if employees. It has nothing do do with producing and selling a product.


    Yet another reason why we maintain our support of Axion. Tom G seems to believe that production capacity expenditures should be linked with demand. I know this idea out of favor.


    If someone gave axpw $50 million fill up current production space, they would be one the brink of shutting down too. It takes some financial sense to get even a good new technology out. Free money is not free.
    19 Oct 2012, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • Pretty much all special equipment. The only way to re-purpose it is to make batteries for other things like perhaps electronics in the case of the cell manufacturing. Battery assembly? Maybe for stationary but that's about it.


    By and large if it doesn't run there it's almost a complete loss.


    It is nice to see the workers taking the free time and doing work for nonprofits. Do what you can.
    19 Oct 2012, 02:06 PM Reply Like