Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

Axion Power Host
Send Message
Trying to learn stuff
  • Axion Power Concentrator 198: Jan. 16: Axion Power PbC Batteries Continue To Demonstrate Effectiveness For Railroad Applications 294 comments
    Jan 16, 2013 8:24 AM | about stocks: AXPW

    Latest News, Articles and Presentations...

    Axion Power PbC Batteries Continue To Demonstrate Effectiveness For Railroad Applications -- Axion Power™ International, Inc. (OTC QB: AXPW), the developer of advanced lead­-carbon PbC® batteries and energy storage systems, announced today that it completed shipping its high-performance PbC batteries to Norfolk Southern Corp. (NS), one of North America's leading transportation providers, for use in Norfolk Southern's first all electric locomotive - the NS-999.

    Axion Power shipped the last skids that comprised this battery order to NS in late December and the batteries will be used to power the NS-999 "yard switcher" locomotive. The switcher functions in the train yard where its responsibilities include moving rail cars and assisting in disassembling and assembling various train configurations. In parallel, Axion and Norfolk Southern continue to participate in the development of an energy system for "over the road" hybrid locomotives, that will be much more powerful units that would require significantly more batteries.

    The final shipment of batteries to Norfolk Southern means that approximately $475,000 in revenue, attributable to the eventual re-commissioning of the NS-999, will be recognized in Axion's results for the fourth quarter of 2012, according to Thomas Granville , Axion Power Chairman and CEO.

    "As we move into 2013, we are excited about the further unveiling of our PbC battery in our ongoing program with NS. The PbC properties that make our battery the chemistry of choice for 'all electric' and 'hybrid electric' locomotives - long cycle life, excellent cold temperature performance, fast charge and discharge capability, high charge acceptance, self equalization of charge in large string and in single battery cells, and above all, demonstrated safe operation regardless of temperature - all of these battery property advantages play well in a variety of other markets. Our new initiatives going forward include heavy trucks, charging station applications, residential energy and buffering and storage for wind and solar," Granville said.

    PR Newswire (

    Axion Power Residential Energy Storage HUB Certified to UL, CSA Standards -- Axion receives UL certification and CSA Standards for their Residential Energy Storage HUB.

    "ePower's Series Hybrid Electric Drive - Unmatched Fuel Economy for Heavy Trucks" -- by John Petersen. Discusses the potential fuel savings for ePower's Hybrid electric drive for class 8 trucks using Axion's PbC batteries.

    "Axion Power - A Battery Manufacturer Charging Forward" -- by John Petersen. This is an excellent summation on Axion Power's history. It is a good starting point for introducing Axion Power to friends and family.

    13th European Lead Battery Conference, ELBC -- Sliderocket of John Petersen's presentation at the ELBC.

    Dr. Ender's Dickinson's Presentation on Axion's PbC -- Link to his slideshow at the 13th ELBC.

    Axion Power's 3rd Quarter Report and Press Release -- Seeking Alpha also published the transcript of the conference call here.

    RoseWater Joins Queen's University on Energy Storage Study -- Testing will determine the effects of residential energy storage systems on local power grids.

    Axion Power Weighted Moving Average Prices and Volume:

    (updated thru 01/12/2013)

    (click to enlarge)

    (click to enlarge)

    Axion Power Concentrator Comments Activity:

    (click to enlarge)
    Links to important Axion Power research and websites:

    The Axion Power Concentrator Web Sites, created by APC commentator Bangwhiz. It is a complete easy-to-use online archive of all the information contained in the entire Axion Power Concentrator series from day one, including reports, articles, comments and posted links.

    Axion Power Wikispaces Web Site, created by APC commentator WDD. It is an excellent ongoing notebook aggregation of Axion Power facts.

    Axion Power Website. The first place any prospective investor should go and thoroughly explore with all SEC filings and investor presentations as well as past and present Press Releases.

    Axion Power Intra-day Statistics. HTL tracks and charts AXPW's intra-day statistics.
    Be sure and either follow the Axion Power Host ID on Seeking Alpha or click the check-box labeled "track new comments on this article" just ahead of the comments section!
    WARNING: This is a troll free zone. We reserve the right to eliminate posts, or posters that are disruptive.


    Disclosure: I am long OTCQB:AXPW.

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 (294)
Track new comments
  • timing is everything in life
    16 Jan 2013, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • Oops. #1
    16 Jan 2013, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • 3rd after 2 seconds in a row
    16 Jan 2013, 08:36 AM Reply Like
  • JCI has just published a more detailed description of their micro-hybrid battery, which sounds a lot like a mild hybrid to me.



    The most interesting element of their proposed solution is a "New 8-10 kW motor generator," which would be 4 to 5 times more powerful than the 2 kW SpeedStart motor generator used on the LC Super Hybrid.



    To put the JCI number in perspective, the GM LaCrosse uses a 115 volt lithium-ion battery to power a 15 kW belt alternator starter.

    16 Jan 2013, 08:52 AM Reply Like
  • Anybody else notice that little disclaimer within the phase 4 event?


    Engine Off
    "May be inhibited due to climate control demand or battery condition"


    In other words "isn't going to work if you're using heat or a/c or if your battery is more than 6 months old".


    Surely automakers are smart enough to see through this BS, aren't they?


    16 Jan 2013, 09:39 AM Reply Like
  • The JCI micro hybrid battery.



    D. McHattie,
    I think that what they are trying to say is that with the 48 volt system the AC climate control will be electric and that stop/start will not be inhibited due to climate control. Not sure if I wrote that clearly.
    16 Jan 2013, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • I would love to know if GM and BMW have been testing a 48V battery from Axion (potentially the reason Axion did not waste time and expense with the LC Super Hybrid project?)


    Will JCI release the costs of their 48V Li-ion MicroHybrid battery soon?
    16 Jan 2013, 10:07 AM Reply Like
  • jakurtz, In my opinion JCI will not release the pricing on the 48VDC offering. It's not a consumer product so why release such information into the public domain. They are looking to sell it to industry. Plus it needs to go thought years of testing and the current price does not reflect what it will be then. I'm sure targets have been shared between the parties. If JCI can't meet them and someone else can then JCI is out. That's the good thing about having multiple suppliers of technology to service a function. It's self policing.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:14 AM Reply Like
  • jakurtz,
    I would love that GM and BMW are testing 48V systems using PbC. However, IIRC the DOE grant is for a 2 battery system and 150 amp DCA, so not sure if Axion is yet to a 48V system. Just my 2 cents and ploy to recapture the damp rag award..
    16 Jan 2013, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks Metro. I only looked at the first link and didn't realize the 48V is lithium ion so I would expect it to have good DCA and cycle life.


    I guess there are 2 primary lessons here:


    1) JCI is acknowledging that AGM isn't going to cut it for mild hybrid


    2) other than JCI, the LAB industry is blowing this opportunity by sticking to LAB 1.0 and 2.0


    Hopefully other LAB-makers see this and hear a wake-up call to get on board with the PbC.


    Surely they could make a 'Micro Hybrid' battery like JCI's with the PbC and do it cheaper. Either that or prepare to be buried.


    16 Jan 2013, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie,
    "In other words "isn't going to work if you're using heat or a/c or if your battery is more than 6 months old"."


    For this battery, the issue of battery age/sulfation shouldn't be a problem, because they are using the Li-ion part of the battery for everything but starting the car. The question is whether buyers are going to be willing to pay for a Li-ion option when there is a cheaper PbC option that will do the same thing.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • What a terrific opportunity for a JCI competitor to undercut JCI's concept by offering the same solution but with a PbC instead of Li-ion.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:01 AM Reply Like
  • Once we see the final outcome we will look back and realize all these offerings in some shape or form are pieces of a puzzle. The industry will use them all +/- some percentage of the market because different solutions will solve different needs.


    We need to remember that cost is not the only metric in component selection. If this were the case BMW and Mercedes would not be developing carbon fiber in an effort to get it down to only 4 times the cost of steel in a common function use.


    We need to also understand there are regulations in various markets that need to be satisfied. We also need to take into account that Mr. consumer is not wanting just the lowest price ALWAYS or just the best performance. So different technologies will find their way into the market. It's a big one.


    A JCI solution may find a perfectly fine market to satisfy. No guarantees at this point but given the number of customer ears they have I doubt they are flying blind.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • No matter what one does with Li, it ain't ever going to like moisture and when bundled requires cooling. Come on PbC. I wonder what the Li push would be if not for subsidized manufacturing factories and research facilities. Again, come on PbC.


    Possibly, Li cells may not like significant nor repetative "ambient" pressure changes either. Just a guess. Boeing should know.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:46 AM Reply Like
  • It's also nice because they have now given us something to compare ourselves to. We have a yardstick now.


    16 Jan 2013, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • 'No guarantees at this point but given the number of customer ears they have I doubt they are flying blind.'


    An obvious but thus far unspoken and important point.
    Thanks for making it iindelco
    16 Jan 2013, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • This does bring to mind a question I have about weather using a car batter to keep the AC going for even a short time is practical, it takes a lot of power to run a compressor and a car gets hot very fast without the AC on in the Texas heat.
    I can see keeping the fan going and maybe having a cold reserve??
    16 Jan 2013, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • Arge: ISTR some links posted about "phase change" AC units. One ISTR uses a wax that is cooled and solidified when the motor runs and then absorbs heat, cooling the air, when the motor is off.


    Maybe the person that originally found them can remind.


    16 Jan 2013, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • ARGE, They are working on it. I've seen proposals from Denzo, Bosch and Delphi. I'm sure there are others. Valeo just made a big acquisition in NA so I'm sure they are at the table as well.


    Energy Storage: Phase Change Materials for Thermal Energy Storage

    16 Jan 2013, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • I wonder is storing some liquid coolant for use after the engine stops would work? I'm not knowledgeable enough to know the mass/minute needed.
    Then there is the problem of storing the gaseous coolant after it evaporates and adsorbs heat.
    Ummm, never mind!
    16 Jan 2013, 06:44 PM Reply Like
  • "No matter what one does with Li, it ain't ever going to like moisture"


    Why would a sealed battery care about moisture?


    "and when bundled requires cooling"


    Entirely dependent on the specific chemistry and use.


    "Possibly, Li cells may not like significant nor repetative "ambient" pressure changes either."


    The billions of Li cells traveling on planes in laptops, tablets, cell phones, etc. would suggest that's not an issue.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:03 AM Reply Like
  • With SS or micro hybrids the fact is that extended stop times mean the engine will eventually have to kick in if the cooling loads are heavy. This should be a rare enough occurrence that trying to engineer a solution probably isn't worth while. At some point increasing pack size and going to full hybrid would be warranted.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3 -
    "No matter what one does with Li, it ain't ever going to like moisture"


    Why would a sealed battery care about moisture?




    "and when bundled requires cooling"


    Entirely dependent on the specific chemistry and use.




    "Possibly, Li cells may not like significant nor repetitive "ambient" pressure changes either."


    The billions of Li cells traveling on planes in laptops, tablets, cell phones, etc. would suggest that's not an issue.










    17 Jan 2013, 11:55 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks for the loud announcement, not based in reality. PbC will never be used to replace lithium or NiMH on planes. John Petersen agrees with this by the way, so don't take my word.
    Also some basic chemistry, li-ion batteries don't contain metallic lithium, so you can cut them open and expose them to air and nothing will happen, as many people have done.
    The fact that Boeing is having problems in a few planes when tens of thousands of autos and billions of devices using lithium are not suggests that Boeing has a design problem, not a chemistry problem. Boeing also has fuel leaks and windshield cracks on those planes. Following your logic fuel and windshields aren't going to work on planes.
    18 Jan 2013, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • I don't believe that the PbC is a likely contender in aviation.


    The assertion that lithium-ion batteries have a proven safety record is absurd beyond reckoning. Avicenne Energy's presentations at both the ELBC and Batteries 2012 summarize over a half billion dollars of safety related lithium-ion battery recalls over the last 10 years.

  (Slide 19)


    Boeing's problem is yet another example of the kinds of problems that arise when people presume safety and reliability instead of diligently testing for it. The only thing you can safely conclude about the thousands of autos is that they haven't had any disasters YET.


    I firmly believe that it's only a matter of time before a battery pack goes off for no particular reason under a couple of kids who are carefully strapped into their safety seats. Then all hell is going to break loose.
    18 Jan 2013, 09:53 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3 -


    "Following your logic fuel and windshields aren't going to work on planes."


    Hogwash!! Using your above statement would put words in my mouth saying "batteries are not going to work on planes". And that would be absolutely stupid and I would never say that; so you are wrong.


    Maybe the PbC won't work. I'm sure the "experts" are consideration all solutions. And if the only reason to rule out the PbC is a weight/volume penalty, then the next hurdle is certification and the time involved v/s all the other potential solutions which of course run the gammit from battery solutions to 787 system design changes we probably are not capable of visualizing; possibly as blurred as we are with batteries, or worse.


    PS - "design" does not get hot, smoke, burn, and melt and fuse metal.
    18 Jan 2013, 11:48 AM Reply Like
  • Even if every Li-ion battery in service doesn't blow up, the effort and the moving parts required to keep them from blowing up are an expensive and complicated kluge.


    A kluge by definition does the job it is supposed to do, but since Li-ion batteries require complexity to work in motive applications, if a simpler solution is found, it will win.
    18 Jan 2013, 02:32 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3 writes: "PbC will never be used to replace lithium or NiMH on planes"


    Although you are likely correct, JRP3, I'd be careful with using the word "NEVER."


    NiCad has the track record... Li is... ummm... not so good.
    18 Jan 2013, 07:11 PM Reply Like
  • I was at the airport yesterday (I have a Cessna 150) and had a chat
    with a buddy who works at Pratt & Whitney as a service technician.
    I was asking about NiCd's vs. Lead acid. He mentioned turbine owners switching to LA after the NiCd's died, mostly because of way higher costs, both initial & maintenance wise. All of the major mfgrs offer LA replacements for originally specd. NiCds. He later e-mailed me this from a turbine tech forum:


    When turbine engines were introduced, it was found that the existing lead acid batteries didn't have the performance characteristics required for starting. Turbine engines need to be cranked for longer periods of time and at higher current. Some early turbines used other means like explosives or air to start because of the lack of a suitable light weight electrical option.


    Ni-Cad batteries offerred a relatively light weight high current source that maintained output voltage much longer than lead acid batteries. They had the added avantage of not being damaged by freezing when discharged like lead acid batteries. Ni-Cads of the day also performed a bit better in cold weather but both had a cold weather limitation of about -30C for different reasons. At about -30C lead acid batteries don't deliver current effectively because of the high internal impedance which increases as temperature decreases. Ni-Cads were capable of delivering a larger current in the cold but would not charge unless the charging voltage was increased. Unfortunately when you did this you ran the risk of the electrolyte overflowing because the electrolyte level in Ni-Cad cells are dependant on charge.


    As mentioned before, Ni-Cads require a temperature monitor. This requirement was introduced in FAR 25 so some older aircraft were not fitted.


    Ni-Cads are more susceptible to thermal run-aways than Lead Acids, but most people erroneously do not consider this a characteristic of a Lead Acid battery.


    Over the years technology has improved to increase the output and performance of lead acid batteries while maintaining reasonable sizes and weights.


    The VRLA (Valve Regulated Lead Acid) Battery was developed to provide, among other things, a starting supply for turbine engines. New batteries manufactured by Concorde, Gill and others are offered as replacements for Ni-Cad batteries. The sizes and shapes are identical and the weights are typically only marginally higher than the Ni-Cads they replace.


    The price is also much lower. The list price of a Ni-Cad battery for a Dash 8 (for example) is about US$8000. A replacement Lead Acid is about US$1500.


    You still have the problem of possible damage if you freeze them when they're dead but the capacity and temperature range rivals the Ni-Cad battery. Using Lead Acid batteries alleviates maintenance costs but does not eliminate them. Capacity checks are still required, but if the battery fails, you simply replace it.


    Manufacturer's also reccommend that they be replaced after about 2000 flight hours as well.


    I service nicads, and have yet to find a more boring task. At least watching paint dry lets you have a nap, but you`ve got to babysit nicads and keep checking the cells. The maintenance costs alone drive some bizjet owners to go leadacid. If the battery performance decreases, just buy another one. It is still cheaper in the long run.
    The state of charge is difficult to determine because a nicad maintains a level voltage reading until just before it goes flat. Also, you cannot determine state of charge by the specific gravity of the electrolyte like you can with a lead acid battery. The only way to measure the state of charge is to induce a measured discharge and time how long it takes each cell to reach a predetermined voltage. Typically, you discharge at the rated amp-hour capacity for one hour and at the end of that hour you must have 85% of the rated capacity left in each cell. This is the reason nicads are so maintenance intensive - each cell must be measured individually during the discharge and a chart kept and blah blah blah. Then you have to discharge them all the way to zero volts, let them sit for 24 hours and charge them back up. If the cell voltages had too big a spread between them, now you have to do a complete discharge and recharge cycle again to "level" the cells and then measure them during a discharge again, which means another discharge/charge cycle. They can take days to service.
    As to the temp warning system, it is not optional, it is required by FAR if the aircraft operateds a nicad battery system. I have only seen thermal runaway one time and that was with a small emergency power supply battery (14 amp/hour capacity as compared to the 42 amp/hour batteries most turbo-prop aircraft use for engine starting). The cells started to explode and blasted holes in the wall and in the roof of the battery shop. If this were to happen in an aircraft, the consequences would be catastrophic.


    Just some input from the trenches I thought would liven up the discussion ....
    18 Jan 2013, 11:23 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks, CO3.


    Elsewhere, I stumbled across a marketing blurb for a vendor of Lifeline 30-HT batteries that mentions use of AGMs in aviation.


    "Concorde, a pioneer in AGM technology was originally developed in 1985 for military aircraft where power, weight, safety and reliability were paramount considerations. This technology was incorporated in the Lifeline series of maintenance free deep cycle batteries that has been the leading AGM battery in the Marine and Motor Coach Industry for the past 15 years and is now original equipment in 135 manufactures worldwide.Lifeline AGM Batteries are proven to be the fastest recharging batteries today because of the low internal resistance. "

  Depending on the source, weight given for Lifeline 30-HT batteries is 96 or 97 lbs.
    19 Jan 2013, 12:05 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks CO3
    Real world experience adds a lot of flavor.
    19 Jan 2013, 03:35 AM Reply Like
  • thanks C03,
    Interesting read.
    19 Jan 2013, 04:52 AM Reply Like
  • "Even if every Li-ion battery in service doesn't blow up, the effort and the moving parts required to keep them from blowing up are an expensive and complicated kluge."


    Actually its not. It's as simple as not over charging or over discharging them. Compared to CO3's post on NiCad's they are much easier to deal with. It's true they are more sensitive to over charging than lead acid but it's quite manageable. Boeing should have had Tesla build their batteries, since they know how to prevent overcharging. As does every other automaker it seems.
    Let's not forget you can overcharge a lead acid battery, and lead acid batteries can and do catch fire and explode.
    19 Jan 2013, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • Jrp3


    "Actually its not. It's as simple as not over charging or over discharging them."


    Whether the were overcharged or not is just the latest speculation.


    "Boeing should have had Tesla build their batteries, since they know how to prevent overcharging. As does every other automaker it seems."


    Tesla does not build batteries.


    Do you have a list automakers who design Li-Ion battery packs for aviation purposes?


    Stop misleading with false claims of a 'cure' for an unknown problem.


    "Forward thinker, tirelessly fighting against misinformation."


    Apparently by giving out false and misleading information.
    19 Jan 2013, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • "It's as simple as not over charging or over discharging them."


    I guess that's why automakers go to so much effort and expense to shield them from external sources of heat and impact.


    Oh, wait. External sources of heat and impact have nothing to do with charging.
    19 Jan 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • froggey,


    "Tesla does not build batteries."


    That is a false statement. Tesla does build batteries, they do not build cells.


    Where did I say any automakers design Li-ion packs for aviation? I said Tesla and other OEM's know how to prevent overcharging, and whatever issue Boeing must be having, since they don't experience it.
    To that point:
    "Maybe already under control, but Tesla & SpaceX are happy to help with the 787 lithium ion batteries. "


    It seems rather obvious that you are the one spreading false and misleading information.
    20 Jan 2013, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • billa,
    Please list the great effort and expense incurred to shield packs from external heat and impact other than practical design?
    20 Jan 2013, 09:31 AM Reply Like
  • :)) Funny


    Russell Glass ‏@glassruss


    superman to the rescue @elonmusk "Maybe already under control, but Tesla & SpaceX are happy to help with the 787 lithium ion batteries."
    20 Jan 2013, 09:44 AM Reply Like
  • JRP:


    Please see this Nissan Presentation (PowerPoint), particularly the last section, on battery safety and protection:



    (All Axionistas might find this interesting.)


    If you don't have PowerPoint, you can get the viewer here:

    20 Jan 2013, 10:37 PM Reply Like
  • Noticed they only stated an off side front end collision, no mention of a vehicle being T-boned at an intersection type collision.
    21 Jan 2013, 03:09 AM Reply Like
  • It's called the side impact test, which all cars must pass. I guess the LEAF did.
    21 Jan 2013, 09:18 AM Reply Like
  • billa,
    Nissan made the pack waterproof and crash protected. What else would you expect? I don't see any great engineering expenses there, just good design.
    21 Jan 2013, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • You see what you want to see.


    Perhaps you will be able to drum up support for motive Li-ion batteries here and elsewhere.


    Good luck.
    21 Jan 2013, 02:21 PM Reply Like
  • Not trying to drum up support, just keeping the FUD levels down to a minimum where possible.
    22 Jan 2013, 08:33 AM Reply Like
  • Following John is an honor!
    16 Jan 2013, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • What I find interesting is that JCI is describing a new motor generator to be used with their dual battery product. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't JCI sell batteries, not motor generators? So who's making the new generator and which OEM has already agreed to use it?
    16 Jan 2013, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • JCI sells a whole lot more than just batteries. It wouldn't surprise me if they started to make electric motors.
    16 Jan 2013, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker, I would doubt JCI is going to move into the area given it is already dominated by companies like Denso, Bosch, Valeo, Delco Remy etc. JCI has their hands full with interiors given their corporate scale.


    I think they will leave it at energy storage systems in the space.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:03 AM Reply Like
  • I thought buried in the subject literature was the description of Switched Reluctance and CT as the "motor" guys.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:55 AM Reply Like
  • NJB, There are a few players in the area. My point was that it is highly unlikely JCI is going to move into the space. It is already well populated. I can really see no strategic reason for them to do so and chances are they would just be wasting a ton of capital trying to do so. They have many disadvantages in the space and no advantages that I can see.
    16 Jan 2013, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • Another "also ran" in motor space we don't need.


    Now the Chorus Motor works where other motors don't, That's a game changer, but not when it also looks like just another "also ran" and it's distinctives are not necessary nor exhibited in order to wipe out all competitors.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:34 PM Reply Like
  • Is this the "someone wanted to buy low" I mentioned yesterday? Seems likely.


    100K @ $0.35 11:45:03. This with no NBBO quantity matching on either side. MM working to accumulate and then making the sale?


    Volume prior to that trade 113.6K VWAP $0.3529, buy:sell 1:1.55. Must be a buy because ask was $0.3499 then.


    So, does MM now need to buy low to cover a short or were the shares already in hand at a lower price?


    EDIT: Corrected VWAP to $0.3529.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • "So, does MM now need to buy low to cover a short or were the shares already in hand at a lower price?"


    This is like sitting in grad school 25 years ago and people asking questions and making observations that I had no clue as to how they came up with as I was struggling just to grasp the basics.
    16 Jan 2013, 12:01 PM Reply Like
  • "So, does MM now need to buy low to cover a short or were the shares already in hand at a lower price?"


    Whichever applies to that particular transaction, without another positive news announcement ISTM that "mean reversion" thesis mentioned within the past day or two is likely to play out.
    16 Jan 2013, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • D-Inv: I'm a strong believer in the mean reversion. The caveat is that I think it depends on two things in a down move: non-MMs deciding to take profts (or avoid losses); MMs trying to generate volume and/or cover short positions (sometimes), taking profits on short-term long positions (sometimes) or filling big orders at lower prices.


    I think we are seeing all those scenarios recently. But they can be offset by shrewd long-term buyers taking advantage of short-term weakness, so reversion is *never* a given near-term.


    Another thing that can abort it is technical traders that recognize such as trend lines, rising averages and other TA indicators, and working on the (anticipated) reversals that might be apparent in these things, such as swing traders, and momo traders.


    Of course, these also contribute to the reversion at times as they take their profits.


    Right now, with so many SMAs rising, volume being generally strong, an apparent rising (+$0.01/week, appx.) trading channel in play, and anticipation of potential good news soon again (although I don't personally hang my hat on that), there's a decent chance I won't get to deploy my dry powder at that anticipated level.


    16 Jan 2013, 12:35 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv and HTL,
    OK, I've got a market question for you two. A123 is in chapter 11 and was sold for less than its bills. The stock plunged down to $0.02/share. But it is still trading. Today there has been 39 million shares bought/sold because the price has risen from 2 cents a share to 4 cents a share. My question is...who is buying this and why? Is this all just a nonstop game of musical chairs where the goal is to be the one not holding the shares when the final sales goes through?
    16 Jan 2013, 01:05 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech,


    "all just a nonstop game of musical chairs where the goal is to be the one not holding the shares when the final sales goes through?"





    Greater Fool Theory at work.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • LabT, I can only say I hold no AONE shares and would not consider buying any. What value others might see in the shares is for them to say.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:24 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech: I *must* profess total ignorance on that. Why it's even trading is beyond me.


    16 Jan 2013, 01:26 PM Reply Like
  • Seems like someone is providing a service to those that want to sell to establish the loss/gain (or simply get the reminder of a terrible trade off someone's screen)
    16 Jan 2013, 01:33 PM Reply Like
  • OT -


    Not sure if anyone follows Cytomedix, a small company that I have written on, but this pp on the state of the regenerative medicine market came across my desk.

    16 Jan 2013, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan: there's an instablog run by Focalpoint Analytics (affectionally known as "Rattie" from his original avatar - one of the original 'Gades) devoted to bio stuff. I think he would love to see that stuff over there.



    16 Jan 2013, 07:21 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan,


    I took a look at Cytomedix earlier this past year and thought they had a very promising concept that needed more research. But I did not see a stock story I felt was compelling enough for the high risk of a penny stock in the competitive field of biotech.


    What gives them a moat in separating plasma and platelets, which is not a new technology?
    16 Jan 2013, 08:32 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin -


    I think the best place to get a current overview is to take a look at Jason Napodano's work.



    I originally had some concerns with your point, but Cytomedix is the only FDA approved treatment option that has been granted CMS coverage and also has the Angel system in its portfolio. As with Axion, I think the regenerative medical market will be so large that there will be many players.


    HTL - I will go post it over there...
    16 Jan 2013, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • Any chance that our little runup was some kind of front running of the new patent award? Timing seems a bit co ink a dental...
    16 Jan 2013, 12:29 PM Reply Like
  • I'd say the NSC news was the one, and the patent news isn't well known yet. A nice PR on that could get us to 40!
    16 Jan 2013, 12:34 PM Reply Like
  • JohnP, given that you are apparently in frequent contact with Andy Claypole, an explanation for why, for at least several days, epower engine systems' website is missing and replaced by an "oops" message implying non-payment of webhosting fees would be appreciated.


    epower seems the fastest route to generating battery sales for axion. The missing epower website is unsettling.
    16 Jan 2013, 12:39 PM Reply Like
  • RuggedDC,
    It was reported the other day that the website had been hacked. I would assume it is down until the company can get an IT guy to fix it. The fact that someone took the time to hack it, makes you wonder who didn't want people looking at their website?
    16 Jan 2013, 01:17 PM Reply Like
  • I left a voice message for Andy, but don't have a number he can call me back at yet. If Andy's anything like me, he probably figures that the website is more trouble than its worth. He's not selling truck retrofits to Internet shoppers and when you're running lean with a limited staff things like a static website that hasn't been updated in over a year are a low priority item. ePower needs to keep its site up as a PR thing, but we need to remember that the website has nothing to do with its business success or failure.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:17 PM Reply Like
  • Labtech, I haven't seen any indication that the website was hacked, so I think you are jumping to a conspiracy conclusion about ePower.


    A failure to pay could be something serious, but most likely it is an expired credit card or a stupid bank mistake. A failure to pay page could also be the result of the ISP itself having financial problems. Never assign evil to an action that can be explained by stupidity. “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.” - Albert Einstein


    The "malware" reports typically are because the hosting ISP has an infected site that is reported on a blacklist. True malware would keep the site up, either with corrupted / vandalized information or spreading malware to visitors.


    Epower should get their site up for PR. I probably have slightly stronger feeling about it than JP, but I agree the site is not critical to their success or failure.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • JP, agreed that its the kind of thing that can wait a few days or a week. Beyond that that it seems kind of unprofessional but I don't read into it. I know well with smaller businesses; stuff happens. =)
    16 Jan 2013, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • Rick,
    My statement was based upon the post of VictorG45 in concentrator 197. He posted the following:
    "It looks like ePowers website has been hijacked. My avast virus scanner informs me that the site is being redirected to a malicious domain and blocks me from looking at it. It will probably take their tech dept the rest of the day to get it back up."


    I will admit that I didn't go to the website myself to see if my antivirus software gave me the same warning, but considering they took down the website shortly thereafter, I am assuming he was telling the truth. As to conspiracy conclusions, I'll need to borrow HTL's tinfoil hat before I discuss those with you.
    16 Jan 2013, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • I use Avast similar to what VictorG45 said told him it was blocked. I don't get the same message.


    For all the sleuthing you guys do on here this is really a simple fix. A whois search turned up that the website was registered to and owned by Andy Claypole. Second, I called the number and that is a number to the billing department. My guess is that a bill has not been paid. My guess is Andy pays godaddy for website design, hosting, etc. and hasn't paid a bill. He contacts godaddy get it straightened out and they are back up and running. The fact that its been a few days is surprising.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • LT, I had read VictorG45's comment, too, and was not accusing him of lying. My point is that many antivirus products indicate false positives when a hosting ISP has hosted another "bad" site, which may have nothing to do with the site in question.


    Maybe there was malware on the ePower site, or maybe it really is a conspiracy. The evidence that I've seen indicate simple errors, not anything nefarious. Of course, I could be completely wrong and the very next post will document a huge, ugly situation with Chinese spies, OPEC, and Li-battery activists.
    16 Jan 2013, 07:04 PM Reply Like
  • Maybe they're getting ready to switch/upgrade to some other provider/host (hoping)... and didn't want to renew a term contract with godaddy... kind of an inelegant way to go about it, but if they're looking to relaunch their site (which was pretty weak as it was) somewhere else, maybe burning bridges with godaddy was unavoidable... but I'm just talking off the top of my head. Who the heck knows? I gotta think we hafta see something resolve before too long, but true, the longer it hangs out there like a bleeding limb, the more questionable it arguably becomes...
    16 Jan 2013, 07:20 PM Reply Like
  • Rick: No connection, but it's known that Capstone's website was compromised, apparently going back to September.



    16 Jan 2013, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • Which would you rather have guys?


    ePower working on getting the truck on the road?




    ePower screwing around with Go-Daddy?


    ePower does not need a web presence. Unless ePower's management is crazy a pretty website darned well better be their lowest priority.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:36 PM Reply Like
  • Stop talking like a businessman and get that good looking car racing queen moving on fixing that website. We don't need no stinking fuel economy test results. We want good looking models.
    (Snark infested waters)
    16 Jan 2013, 08:41 PM Reply Like
  • Rick,
    Fair enough. As I said, I didn't go to the website immediately after the warning, so I don't know for sure if it was a malware problem or they just didn't pay their bill. Hopefully both data from the PbC test and an active website will be forthcoming.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • Rick, Your explanation appears to be the most plausible.


    17 Jan 2013, 04:36 AM Reply Like
  • As the bait drifts upward, the bottom feeder must rise to the occasional bob down.


    Added today at .349 to keep my average under .36.


    Now back to wallowing in the depths...
    16 Jan 2013, 12:49 PM Reply Like
  • Yesterday I reprised my highest purchase price ever, at .36. I've had to wait since May 21 to have paid so much. (I added some more today at .35.)
    16 Jan 2013, 12:57 PM Reply Like
  • Would the hub be a suitable storage application for this subsidy?

    16 Jan 2013, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • Don't know the answer to your question but I love the link. Go storage!


    "Solar power storage will relief the grid by decoupling the supply of energy into the grid at the time of generation. Storage also actively contributes towards the maintenance of uniform voltage and frequency of the grid and thereby takes over important jobs for grid management," explained Prof. Dr. Bernd Engel, grid expert at the Technical University Braunschweig.


    With battery storage that is connected to the grid, peaks in electricity production can be reduced up to 40%. Furthermore grid capacity can also be increased by 66% without the need for additional grid expansion. These figures were provided by the Fraunhofer ISE in an actual study.


    BSW Solar's Managing Director Jörg Mayer also added that with storage, the lower feed-in into the grid will also reduce the need for new electricity grids. Additionally the self-consumed solar power will not be remunerated and will thus relieve the green energy allocation funds to a considerable extent."
    16 Jan 2013, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • Maybe Moll starts playing there and becomes an AXPW customer ... in my wildest dreams, of course.


    16 Jan 2013, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • Would seem to be, Stef. TG/Rosewater might consider negotiating an assembly agreement with an EU mfg. and an electrode supply agreement with an EU AGM OEM.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:34 PM Reply Like
  • Subsidize solar storage rather than solar production. Very interesting.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • Read


    "A nation-sized battery" from the OilDrum. Written by a physicist at UCSD, it points up the futility of trying to use battery storage to enable PV or wind to be the functional equivalent of base load capacity. Batteries have their uses, this isn't a good one.



    And this one, about growing energy usage is interesting, if a bit off-topic:

    17 Jan 2013, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • GreenRiver:Two good reads. Thanks for linking them


    From the last page of the second, I wish our Federal Reserve, politicians, ... et al would realize "Once we appreciate that physical growth must one day cease (or reverse), we can come to realize
    that all economic growth must similarly end".


    Might this realization allow an eventual stabilization of the economic engine at sustainable levels? Population growth would adjust too.


    17 Jan 2013, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • German ESA is founded -

    16 Jan 2013, 01:06 PM Reply Like
  • WOW.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:37 PM Reply Like
  • A little sarcasm?
    16 Jan 2013, 02:26 PM Reply Like
  • I believe that comment was at the moment the 614,000 trade went off.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:28 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan, Jon is correct. I saw the block go off at .35 USD and it was just so supportive of the action we've seen the last few days. Sorry if you thought it was a response to a post of yours.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • No worries, I thought there was something in the article that was amiss. I just got back from lunch and also did not realize that was one trade.


    So thanks to both you.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:38 PM Reply Like
  • Niche Maker Rebuilds Fisker EV With Corvette Engine

    16 Jan 2013, 01:38 PM Reply Like
  • Ain't that a kick in the head?


    Well off consumers will get to enjoy the esthetics of the Karma design without the EV silliness.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • Lutz, Rich and bored. What a combination for the creation of toys. I guess the Russian jet just isn't cutting it any more.



    16 Jan 2013, 01:52 PM Reply Like
  • "Niche Maker Rebuilds Fisker hybrid With Corvette Engine"


    Fixed that for you.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:19 AM Reply Like
  • 614k at .35 just went off 1:37:26.
    16 Jan 2013, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • OK, what's that about - HTL, anybody?
    16 Jan 2013, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • JAK: You beat me big time!


    16 Jan 2013, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • When a weed spurts right out of the ground in front of your eyes, you get all fumbly with the keyboard trying to be first at reporting something. I was sweating bullets typing it out faster than anyone else and the order of which to place those words and numbers was giving me fits....all too much for an echinoderm
    16 Jan 2013, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • All this fretting about a few hundreths of a cent changes in bid/ask are meaningless, unless you are daytrading. I would just expect this to drift lower in the absence of any news until it hits around 0.30 again. I might just add some more if it does. In the end, you either believe they will remain a going concern without significant dilution, or you don't.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • I just would like to think it was one of us...


    And when trades like that go off, I wonder if I have enough shares.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • >Jon Springer ... Apparently there is no shortage. So, back-up the truck. I've got my limit along with my own dark thoughts.
    16 Jan 2013, 02:37 PM Reply Like
  • User: I only have context thoughts. Yesterday "sells" were 855496. VWAP was $0.3591. Today "buys", so far, 909950 w/VWAP of $0.3502. This trade, and likely others, were done behind the curtain, either intra-broker or inter-broker or MM to MM. Looks like someone took profits yesterday and (WAG here), got back in today?


    In context of those prices, that would be the only thing that makes sense to me, UNLESS an MM was shedding his long position yesterday at a profit and re-loaded today at a lower price. The MM would've likely known about this incoming "sell" that could be picked up cheap.


    If this second scenario is what happened, look for price to hold up well for a few days as the MM makes profit again.


    Anyone see another scenario, besides a bear found a bull and the trade went "behind the scenes"?


    All ignorance brought into play here,
    16 Jan 2013, 02:44 PM Reply Like
  • It's not the price but the Volume that is drawing attention; imho. It seems we are actually on pace for highest volume ever for Axion; especially if the last 4 days is a sustainable trend.


    The few other times that volume averaged above 500K/day for a month - there were sharp breaks in price. Thus very unlikely we just move/drift sideways under sustained volume unless there is a HUGE buyer vacuuming in a bunch of placement seller shares around .35.


    Assuming the participants are more varied than that I'd expect more volatility (not less) than usual. And I'd bet that buyers will exhaust the sellers first at these low levels; although I've been wrong before.
    16 Jan 2013, 03:03 PM Reply Like
  • I like how, after the giant trade, there was no selling pressure at all. Very peaceful. Very nice. Buyers even started lifting their bids out of the bunker.
    16 Jan 2013, 04:51 PM Reply Like
  • JP just called me on his brand new cell phone from FLA. I informed him of the 614K trade. Neither of us could figure out who the seller was, or the buyer. We both agreed that the trade went off whole; in other words the entire volume went through 1:1 buy/sell, not divided by 2.


    We also agreed that this is the largest single block trade either of us has ever seen, and were both pleased that it went through without affecting share price.


    Though thin, the only entity I could think to do a trade this large is Manatuck Hill, bailing their last shares before the next cap raise.


    Did any of you "Level 2ers" see this coming, or did the trade just go baddabing out of no where? Also, who was the MM performing the trade?
    16 Jan 2013, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • Maya" it went "baddabing out of no where". Never saw a bid/ask so no way to spot the MM. I didn't notice any of the existing, at the time, bids or asks quantity change either.


    16 Jan 2013, 03:37 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks, Hard. Real head scratcher. As bazoooka points out, the volume these past few days is breaking records.


    Another thin possibility is that Special Situations and Manatuck made a behind the scenes deal?
    16 Jan 2013, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • More band aids albeit steps in the right direction. I want a rabbit on mine. No no, A coconut.


    Cabot broadens range of performance additives for advanced lead-acid batteries

    16 Jan 2013, 03:28 PM Reply Like
  • Saw something from these guys last year; google alert got hit today ...


    "Cabot Broadens Range of Performance Additives for Advanced Lead-Acid Batteries


    New PBX™ performance additives improve battery lifetime and performance for telecom, motive power, e-bike and micro-hybrid applications


    BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 16, 2013-- Cabot Corporation (NYSE: CBT) announces three new grades of PBX™ carbon performance additives that are designed to improve lifetime and performance for advanced lead-acid batteries used in applications such as telecom, electric forklift, e-bike and small micro-hybrid vehicles.


    Advanced lead-acid battery applications are the fastest growing component of the $30 billion lead-acid battery market. Trends like the global build out of 3G/LTE mobility services into new emerging areas are driving demand for long lifetime batteries in the telecom industry. Furthermore, the increased use of micro-hybrid vehicles and e-bikes has exposed the performance limitations of traditional lead-acid batteries, such as requiring more cycles at a higher rate of charge and discharge than can be accomplished. With over 130 million e-bikes on the road in China alone and increased use of micro-hybrid vehicles, battery manufacturers have been forced to re-engineer advanced lead-acid batteries to provide improved lifetime and performance."

    16 Jan 2013, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • FERC and PJM dialog on Order 755 is far from done ...


    Jan 15 letter .... 163 pages!

    16 Jan 2013, 03:49 PM Reply Like
  • still reading, but fave line so far ...


    "To comply with the Commission’s directive, PJM proposes to revise section 3.2.2A.1(b)(i) of Schedule 1 of the Operating Agreement to replace “divided” with “multiplied.” "


    Oops ....
    16 Jan 2013, 04:08 PM Reply Like
  • Why don't they understand. Companies are already claiming 400 Wh/kg. ;)) ((; (oop's, rolled over laughing)


    Bosch and partners launch Alpha-Laion project for high-energy Li-ion traction batteries for EVs; targeting 250 Wh/kg

    16 Jan 2013, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • I guess they are trying to catch up to Panasonic. It's nice to set goals that have already been met, success is guaranteed ;)
    17 Jan 2013, 09:23 AM Reply Like
  • Researchers use snail teeth to improve solar cells and batteries:

    16 Jan 2013, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Maya, Sorry. Those are "slowlar cells". ;))


    I said I was sorry first!!!
    16 Jan 2013, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • Well, I'm not. Considering the snails, they are "slowler shells"! "Sticky wicket, eh what"!


    <ducks flying shoes>


    16 Jan 2013, 04:58 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, Better yet! lol


    And I remember "sticky wicket".
    16 Jan 2013, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • Ford Says U.S. May Change Hybrid Fuel Economy Testing
    By Craig Trudell - Jan 16, 2013 11:32 AM CT (Bloomberg)




    "Hybrids can lose about 7 miles per gallon when driving at 75 miles per hour rather than 65 mph, Nair said. A difference of 30 degrees in outside temperature can cause a 5 mpg disparity. Mileage can be another 5 mpg lower for a new hybrid compared with one that’s been driven at least 6,000 miles, he said."



    16 Jan 2013, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • Now, if they could just get moving on minimum life requirements for start-stop, like mentioned in one of the comments.
    16 Jan 2013, 04:47 PM Reply Like
  • Washington State taxing users of electric cars and fuel-efficient vehicles to make up for lost gas tax revenues according to this article:
    16 Jan 2013, 04:27 PM Reply Like
  • "Now, to make up for lost revenue, Washington state will be charging residents who own fuel-efficient vehicles an annual tax of $100. The state has decided that electric car owners need to "contribute their fair share to the upkeep of our roads," says Washington State Senator Mary Margaret Haugen who sponsored the bill."
    Kind of what NC did with internet taxes. When you do your taxes in NC they ask if you bought anything online in the last year. If you say "yes", either you have to produce all the receipts to prove how much tax you paid, or they charge you a flat tax amount for all your transactions.
    Personally, I think the tax should be removed from both fuel and electric and instead you should be taxed based on how many miles you drove in the last year. Most States have annual auto inspections. They could record the mileage then to determine your bill for the year. That's really the only way to be fair.
    16 Jan 2013, 04:47 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, I remember years ago when unscrupulous people would turn back their odometers before a vehicle sale. When there's a will....
    16 Jan 2013, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • I would disagree a bit, LabT. Part of the tax "issue" at this point in time is tendency of legislatures to siphon off highway trust fund revenues for other purposes. That aspect of the problem can only be addressed effectively with a system which denies reprogramming of highway funds to other uses. Wider application of tolls for highway usage priced with congestion and vehicle type (weight related) weighting factors would be equitable.
    :-) A weight factor might disadvantage PbC using vehicle though so maybe we ought to just forget about that element.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv,
    No disagreement from me on the tendency of legislatures to siphon off highway gas tax revenues for other purposes. Like Social Security, there's no guarantee that the money will be spent on what it is collected for once it is in the hands of your State government or the Federal government. My point was that it would be "fairer" to charge everyone a user tax for our road systems based on how much they actually drove, vs how much gas they bought or the mileage their car got.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:44 PM Reply Like
  • Mileage alone won't do it in a fair manner. We know heavier vehicles cause a higher percentage of damage, so a small car driving the same miles does less damage than a pickup truck. Some formula based on mileage and weight should be easy to do.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • JCI, gives some pricing target, time frame guidance for their tech. as they roll out a prototype test vehicle. A shot across the bow given the manufacturer of the test mule?


    Johnson Controls debuts test car, a two-battery 'micro' hybrid


    "Johnson Controls on Wednesday provided a glimpse Wednesday of a prototype car that demonstrates the micro-hybrid technology it has developed for future cars and trucks.


    The company gave Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) a ride in the rebuilt BMW sedan after she toured the company’s battery research and testing center at its Green Bay Avenue headquarters campus."


    "In the micro hybrid, Johnson Controls is forecasting an ability to deliver 15% to 20% improvement in fuel economy at a price point that’s still less expensive than a full-scale hybrid electric car.


    That price point is expected to be about $1,200 to $1,400 for consumers when it hits the market in Europe later in this decade, said Ray Shemanski, vice president of Johnson Controls power solutions.


    The technology is expected to hit the market first in Europe, in the 2016-'17 time frame, Molinaroli said. European carmakers face more strict fuel economy requirements that are linked to mandates to curb emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases."

    16 Jan 2013, 04:47 PM Reply Like
  • Ugh.
    16 Jan 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • Simple coincidence, of course, that their test mule is a Beemer...
    16 Jan 2013, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • Umm; ... "a ride in the rebuilt BMW sedan" and "when it hits the market in Europe later in this decade" makes me wonder if the PbC and US sales are even further off than we thought. =(


    Also since the JCI solution "is expected to hit the market first in Europe, in the 2016-'17 time frame" what does that mean for other solutions like ours? Can we infer JCI and BMW also have a relationship in place regarding their micro-hybrid rollout and they have planned it many years in advance?


    I keep reminding myself we only need a 5%+ niche and we'll be fat cats in the coming US micro-hybrid stop/start takeover. I also need to remind myself there will be MANY others sharing in this pie.


    Too bad XIDE went sour and East Penn isn't public, otherwise maybe we could get some press like this about our economical solution. Tough road when your a micro-cap with a micro-hybrid solution.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • Maybe it's time for BMW to unveil one of their test mules with a PbC inside.


    Lots of good reasons I can think of, besides a "shot across the bow".




    16 Jan 2013, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • Remember though Stefan. These are projections. And they always lean toward looking like Adonis until the wraps come off.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • "JCI, gives some pricing target, time frame guidance for their tech. as they roll out a prototype test vehicle. A shot across the bow given the manufacturer of the test mule?"


    Sounds like it to me, iind, as well as going public with head-to- head competition with Axion.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:11 PM Reply Like
  • In thinking about it, is this just like the Honda that was taken and retrofitted? If JCI is doing this publicly, maybe it is a shot back at BMW? A look at what we can do with your car statement ...
    16 Jan 2013, 05:12 PM Reply Like
  • Wonder if our big volume lately is related to the pending arrival of this news ... could see a number of scenarios ranging from nefarious to "just being prudent"
    16 Jan 2013, 05:16 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks for that post, ii


    I think the most important piece of info in this is that we now have an approximate price point for their system...


    $1200-1400? We should be able to come in well below that. (I am assuming that is the cost of the batteries alone, and not a whole system).
    16 Jan 2013, 05:21 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan, "In thinking about it, is this just like the Honda that was taken and retrofitted? If JCI is doing this publicly, maybe it is a shot back at BMW? A look at what we can do with your car statement ... "


    Concur. JCI has a lot of lithium stuff they need to find a mkt for or it becomes a stain.


    Also from the article:


    "Johnson Controls and its industry partners completed the revamped prototype car in six months, and the vehicle is used for testing different battery configurations and types and showing to potential customers, spokeswoman Gretchen Miller said.


    The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or federal stimulus package, provided $299.5 million in funding for Johnson Controls to ramp up domestic production of advanced batteries."


    At least it's nice to know we already are in there testing with BMW, and we have been for years. And GM, and more recently, the huge asian manufacturer.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • "JCI, gives some pricing target, time frame guidance for their tech. as they roll out a prototype test vehicle. A shot across the bow given the manufacturer of the test mule?"


    It for sure signals that JCI is competing hard to retain it's market for AGM batts.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:28 PM Reply Like
  • "$1200-1400? We should be able to come in well below that. (I am assuming that is the cost of the batteries alone, and not a whole system). "


    :-) Co inky dink that $1,200 - $1,400 nicely brackets 3X Norfolk Southern's NS999 PbC battery purchase price?
    16 Jan 2013, 05:35 PM Reply Like
  • Also wanted to add that JCI is not blind---they know BMW is close to a fleet test decision with the PbC.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:46 PM Reply Like
  • >D-inv ...At 48 Vdc, Axion's solution would be right in there at $1200 initially. Might move lower at scale, but we don't know that right now and it is just an assumption that Axion could be cheaper. Then we're into talking about energy density timeframes for the hotel load. A totally unknown variable.


    I would imagine that the PbC would be slightly cheaper and operate with more reliability in temperature extremes and be recyclable. Considerations that might hold an edge.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:50 PM Reply Like
  • Umm; ... "a ride in the rebuilt BMW sedan" and "when it hits the market in Europe later in this decade" makes me wonder if the PbC and US sales are even further off than we thought. =("


    The real question is: Will it happen at all ?
    16 Jan 2013, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • >LT ... I don't like asking that question at all but understand it is one that needs consideration constantly. Axion has a lot of irons in the fire that puts out no heat. I continue my search for Customer No. 1 and wonder.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:20 PM Reply Like
  • I see a lot of unnecessary panic in response to the JCI announcement of a S/S BMW prototype.


    First of all, it confirms the lengthy time it has taken Axion to reach fleet testing with BMW. Even JCI expects to have to take several years for its product to be adopted.


    Second, I did not notice a partnership with BMW. The test car was a rebuilt BMW. I skimmed the article because I don't have much time right now so I may have missed something.


    Third, it appears that JCI is trying to tell everyone what it is going to do since its huge investment in AGM battery production will not fill the need for the huge market of S/S batteries. It may be that JCI has lost out on negotiations with Axion and some other manufacturer has agreed to work with Axion to provide PbC batteries. It is in high gear doing damage control.


    Fourth, unless I missed it in my quick read, BMW has not done a joint announcement with JCI. Even if they did, BMW is working with all battery technologies in order to make sure it catches the wave.


    Fifth, nothing has changed with all the potential markets for Axion. This announcement by JCI has not affected what we already know.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:25 PM Reply Like
  • It also confirms yet again that JCI knows that regardless of carbon pastes and 'additives', AGM isn't going to cut it.


    JCI needs a PbC-killer and this is their attempt.


    I still like ours better but now we have a dogfight.


    16 Jan 2013, 06:28 PM Reply Like
  • "That price point is expected to be about $1,200 to $1,400 for consumers when it hits the market in Europe later in this decade, said Ray Shemanski, vice president of Johnson Controls power solutions."


    I just wonder what assumptions went into that price point at 5-6 years in the future.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • In JCI's most recent investor presentation. They describe the micro-hybrid energy storage solution as "white space"/ "opportunity" on page 8 of the Power Solutions section -- they have this "white space" in between their AGM and Li-ion product lines.



    So this is their answer for the micro-hybrid system. For now and for demonstration purposes the type of energy storage device they use in this system will be the only technology they have available at this time that can do the job, which is Li-ion. Over the next year or two Axion will show, and has shown to BMW and NS, their PbC is as good or better and also demonstrate they can manufacture it in commercial quantity. They should be able to demonstrate this through the NS projects as well as PC's, HUB's, APU's and ePowers' system.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • I'm not so sure JCI thinks it will take 3+ years of testing to get their product ready but rather that the micro-hybrid and EPA needs wont force this issue until 2016+.


    Thus my concern for Axion is the time until a design win for Axion. I do still believe AXPW get a slice of this pie.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:51 PM Reply Like
  • Keeping in mind that battery testing and development often takes twice as long as planned... and doubling the length of time estimated by JCI... I guess we won't be seeing competition from them until 2021.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • Agreed, but at what point does bmw either $#!@ or "get off the pot"? =)


    We are about 30 months into this dance
    16 Jan 2013, 07:33 PM Reply Like
  • Whenever I read a phrase like "a ride in the rebuilt BMW sedan" it tells me that JCI did the rebuild on its own without the assistance of BMW.


    It's a bit like the LC SuperHybrid which was build on a VW platform without the assistance and cooperation of VW.


    When BMW demonstrates a new car with the JCI system I'll be impressed. Until then JCI's just trying to promote a solution and springing for a retrofit demonstration.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:10 PM Reply Like
  • I kind of got a chuckle from your response. Everyone has been waiting to hear what you have to say on it. And you just saunter in JP cool-style with a simple, succinct, insanely logical "until then JCI's just trying to promote a solution and springing for a retrofit demonstration." -- I wanted to say that except it took me three paragraphs and I still didn't get to the point.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:27 PM Reply Like
  • Bazoooka


    <The technology is expected to hit the market first in Europe, in the 2016-'17 time frame, Molinaroli said. European carmakers face more strict fuel economy requirements that are linked to mandates to curb emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.">


    Let's see; If all goes well JCI will start selling this in Europe in 2017 model year. (MY)
    Which as the European standards hit in 2015MY this is a clear statement JCI is not in the running except with 'best available tech' for 2 years.
    In the US it is 2016MY. One year later. Except they aren't planning to bring it here then. So at least 2 years in the US also.


    That seems like good news; JCI is not near term competition and a reiteration that their standard answer is best available tech, which they know, is not good enough to be real competition either.
    ISTM they are going for the following wave of improvements as they have missed this one.


    <In the micro hybrid, Johnson Controls is forecasting an ability to deliver 15% to 20% improvement in fuel economy at a price point that’s still less expensive than a full-scale hybrid electric car.


    That price point is expected to be about $1,200 to $1,400 for consumers>


    There is a wide gap between a full-scale hybrid and "about $1,200 to $1,400"


    The price difference between the Ford Fusion $21k VS the hybrid version $27k is $6k. (Plug in Energi at $39k)
    $1,200-$1,400 is JCI's battery alone. The system is probably around $3k-$4k.


    OK how to compare this to PbC? Well I'm not the tech guy but AFAIK JCI has not even said how much energy is in the battery which makes that comparison impossible.
    4 PbC batteries would get it to 48 volts no problem there.
    Price? Well $1,600 would be 4 of the NS batteries which are truck sized. As JP keep pointing out Axion is at the top left of the learning curve and would we need batteries that big anyway?
    Speed of charge discharge is close enough not to matter much.
    As to size and weight this size battery is not likely to be enough different to be a problem except in the most demanding situations.


    Which may be why Europe is first smaller lighter cars with tighter restrictions, JCI figures in the EU at a higher price Li ion has a better shot.


    I'm happy so many here think JCI would bother to take a "Shot across our bow"
    I'm glad we have an end around them, (and Exide) if needed.
    17 Jan 2013, 07:01 AM Reply Like
  • Froggey; "4 PbC batteries would get it to 48 volts no problem there"


    ISTM that more cells in the case, as they apparently can do to make a 16 volt unit, would be better. So 3 x 16 volt or even 2 x 24 volt could be better. A small loss of energy, but not power, would be likely. Wiring complexity and cost reduced, placement in the vehicle easier. Fewer components = less chance of something failing.


    Hm, I'm wondering if some kind of step-up DC-DC converter might be better. Some loss of efficiency in that though - don't know how much.


    Just meandering here,
    17 Jan 2013, 07:39 AM Reply Like
  • There is nothing magical about the size of the current PbC batteries. To make a 16-volt battery in a conventional case size you simply make each cell a little narrower. If you wanted to divide each cell in two, there's no reason that you couldn't build a 32-volt battery in a conventional case size. The New Castle plant is built for standard automotive case sizes. If the automakers want to go for more voltage, they'll probably use what we'd consider a motorcycle sized case to get the voltage and energy without taking up too much space.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:23 AM Reply Like
  • HTL & JP
    Thanks for chiming in.


    There is way to much negativity in the thread for such an announcement.
    17 Jan 2013, 02:05 PM Reply Like
  • The JCI solution has nothing to do with the micro-hybrids automakers are making today or the second generation models they plan to launch over the next couple years. They're thinking way down the pike to third or fourth generation micro-hybrids that will effectively be ultra-mild hybrids.
    17 Jan 2013, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • JP, that was my thought. It's just not a "this generation" solution.


    Which leaves the question; why are they touting it today? I only see it as a research project for the future. Are they trying to convince someone, like shareholders, that they have a nifty solution for the next two years?


    Loud PR noises always make me suspicious.
    17 Jan 2013, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • "Loud PR noises always make me suspicious."


    Especially in the battery industry ...
    17 Jan 2013, 10:16 PM Reply Like
  • Now that the auto industry has started down the road of using batteries to improve fuel economy its important for companies like JCI to stretch the boundaries and let the engineers know what is or may be possible with increasing electrification.


    I view the entire space as a continuum or spectrum that starts with three flavors of micro-hybrids on the left, leaves a gap before getting to mild hybrids like the LaCrosse, and leaves another gap before getting to the heavy hybrids like the Prius.


    The JCI battery solution has nothing to do with the three current flavors of micro-hybrids and everything to do with a gap filler between heavy micro-hybrids and mild HEVs.
    18 Jan 2013, 05:38 AM Reply Like
  • JCI showed an opportunity opening in their offerings so now we are getting a vision of what they are thinking as one possible solution.


    One of the things we talked about in the past in this forum was that BMW would probably go public with their Axion studies to say "Look guys, I have a need and you're not taking care of it. Get to work because we need a solution. This is JCI's response. We also saw an Exide response.


    BMW does not want one solution. They want a foot race. Let the games begin.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:21 PM Reply Like
  • Yeah, I think it's clear there will be many suitors for advanced battery contracts. I just think the article's 2016-17 predictions for Europe make me wonder if some assumptions here of a possible 2014/15 model design win are aggressive. And if so how do we grow our company if we have to beg for nickels every New Year. Will the NS revenues be our savior? 2017 seems far away when you only have enough cash to get you to April.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Bazooooka, A 2014 my, which is 2013 cy is a little too aggressive at this point IMO. It's so hard to figure out exactly where the opportune point for uptake is in the automakers plans because they are just so secretive.


    Remember with Axion you'd have to watch for the activity long before you'd see the business going out the door. An announcement would be almost as good as sales for their future at this point. Axion is so small there would be no way to mask any activity short of out and out licensing of the technology complete.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • Agreed; I'm actually starting to think 2017 model year for the US versions =(


    Thus I think Axion might have to give up some of their destiny to get to the finish line here. It might take another Quercus type investment to fill up our tanks for the long journey.


    Many small bio-techs have to do the same when the get a CRL letter in a phase III yet they have no funds left to do additional trials (albeit they likely have a drug winner on their hands).
    16 Jan 2013, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • So I'm al little usual. JCI rolls out a 48 volt dual battery system and says that they expect it to be the system of the future. We've talked about the possibility of a 48V system for the PbC in the past with the acknowledgement that, in the long run it probably would make sense for the auto industry to go that way, but that the OEMs didn't seem to be rushing to give up the 12V systems that everything is currently based upon. BMW has been testing the PbC in a format that is either 12V or possibly 16V with some slight modifications. So what's to stop them from going forward with the PbC for all the current designs while continuing to consider redesigning their cars for a possible 48V system in the future? It seems a lot of us are worrying about JCI beating us to the punch for start-stop when they've developed a battery that, as far as I can tell, no car on the market can currently use. Again...did I miss something?
    16 Jan 2013, 10:59 PM Reply Like
  • ...and may the odds be EVER in our favor!
    16 Jan 2013, 11:48 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, Just don't support what's needed (tech.) for the future with what's on the road today or coming soon. This is all future world stuff. And as we know it starts to get foggy the further out you look. Especially if you're an outsider. We don't know how much of the market will be 12 VDC or 12/42or48 VDC in the 2016/2017 CY time frame. It will be split for sure and most likely leaning toward 12 VDC only.
    17 Jan 2013, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • IIndelco
    As I said above I think JCI is actually a bit late for the first wave in 2015MY. rather they will be available 2017MY and we have a 2 year lead in the foot race.
    17 Jan 2013, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • Froggey, Got ya and agree.
    17 Jan 2013, 03:02 PM Reply Like
  • Question from the uninformed:


    Would it be legal for one of the 2012 round investors to sell today at 35c in the knowledge of an agreed deal for upcoming 2013 round at a lower price?


    One would hope not, but....
    16 Jan 2013, 05:32 PM Reply Like
  • I'm impressed that a buyer would buy 614k shares in the mkt when that kind of size should allow them into Tranche II, assuming the cap raise is not with a strategic investor.
    16 Jan 2013, 05:54 PM Reply Like
  • MrI: Implications of that? E.g. does the buyer know they won't lose at that price? News leak? There must be some implications when someone lays out $214,900.00.


    Since I have no background I don't even want to speculate. But folks with a background might have seen some similar situations in the past?


    16 Jan 2013, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • " I'm impressed that a buyer would buy 614k shares in the mkt when that kind of size should allow them into Tranche II, assuming the cap raise is not with a strategic investor. "


    Could be that a deep pockets investor decided to roll the dice with that purchase. On the whole, I find that block purchase very positive and potentially signalling very positive news is in the offing.


    Potential news candidates that come to mind include 1) 1X MW PowerCube sale, 2) 10X HUB sales disclosure, 3) an auto S/S Design win or fleet testing announcement, 4) announcement of a second RR locomotive customer, 5) NSC purchase of PbCs for an OTR locomotive, 6) announcement of a PbC design win with major truck OEM for APU power, 7) an ePower Engines purchase of batteries for multiple class 8 trucks, and 8) a buyout offer.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, too many moving components for me to do anything but wildly speculate. And that's too much for even me!
    16 Jan 2013, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • "E.g. does the buyer know they won't lose at that price? News leak? "


    Transactions based on insider info is only a consideration for officials of public companies. IINM, officers/principals of privately held companies don't face potential sanctions.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • I will say that even some deep pocketed investors either won't or can't invest in private placements. If that's the case here, interesting that they simply don't wait until after the deal.


    Anyway, I just wanted to make sure there was some commentary about the buy side of that block.
    16 Jan 2013, 07:09 PM Reply Like
  • Speaking, of which, I forgot to mention that we had another 100K block go at $0.35 at 11:45:03 AM. I wonder if it's related. That's another $35000.00. That brings the total to a "more reasonable" $249,900 and if we allow $100 in fees, a cool quarter-mil.


    Folks like round numbers, do they not? :-))


    16 Jan 2013, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • 1/16/13: EOD stuff partially copied to the concentrator.
    # Trds: 52, MinTrSz: 200, MaxTrSz: 614000, Vol 1005050, AvTrSz: 19328
    Min. Pr: 0.3475, Max Pr: 0.3600, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3505
    # Buys, Shares: 40 935950, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3504
    # Sells, Shares: 12 69100, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3518
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 13.54:1 (93.1% “buys”), DlyShts 33500 (3.33%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 48.48%


    Things of note suggest that any in-depth considerations would be a waste since abnormal forces are at work. A block trade of 614K at $0.35 was done, so average trade size is off the chart at 19,328. Today's buy:sell is a nice contrast to yesterday's 1:9.74 (today's “buys” of 93.1% vs 9.3% ).


    Without the big trade, daily shorts would be more normal. As it is, nothing seems to be worth considering.


    None of the usual TA or experimental stuff can be considered of use, IMO, in this situation because a general sentiment-based behavior is not being reflected in the price and volume or buy:sell or ...


    Well, you see how this is going. One of my shorter posts as I end by saying we have to let things start behaving normally before even I think there might be some use in reading the squiggles again.


    Details of “Dly Sht % of 'sells'” and inflection points omitted here.


    16 Jan 2013, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • The old technical adage is that "volume precedes price." With a stock like AXPW that isn't widely known, I view the combination of accelerating price (notwithstanding a couple days of consolidation) and accelerating volume as exceedingly bullish, indicative of both a broadening of interest in our stock and an intensification of interest. Any pullback should be used as a buying opportunity.


    (Looking forward to JP's comments on the JCI Beemer demo.)
    16 Jan 2013, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • Alpha: I like that adage. And we sure had volume preceding price the last few days - roughly 6.1MM 1/7 to now, ~763K/day. On 1/4 our 10, 25, 50 and 100-day averages were, in thousands, 309, 337, 311 and 361.


    The current averages have now aligned in the right order for those intervals too: today they are 662, 498, 400 and 376.


    Looking at his charts in the header, looks like the 200-day is ~33xK and his 10 and 50-day averages are above that.


    Looks like everything may be fitting in with JPs thinking.


    16 Jan 2013, 07:48 PM Reply Like
  • Yup, JP likely will soothe the naysayers (much needed). Hopefully he comes back online in the next few hours otherwise it'll be a must read in the morning as East Coast time means half this board goes nitey while I'm still up.
    16 Jan 2013, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    I am talking from a non-technical point of view. But today I witnessed someone who wanted to dump a load of Axion stock. Further I saw someone who wanted to buy a load of the stock. And the price was way above the $ .21 of just a few weeks ago.


    I am surprised that the supply was there. Who is selling?
    I am not surprised that a buyer, in the know, wants to invest.


    I have to believe the buyer is an employee of a firm that is testing the PbC product. But not sophisticated enough to know how to buy into the next cap raise.
    But there was little stock offered after that sale. Either a couple of management funds trading stock or a willing buyer that lucked into a large seller at the moment.
    My guess is that few shares remain available at this price.


    All good in my book.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:29 PM Reply Like
  • I don't know how much soothing there is to do.


    The JCI battery demonstration is clearly an attempt to promote a "better mousetrap" to an auto industry that may or may not be interested in a $1,200 to $1,400 battery for a car that's more "mild hybrid" than "micro hybrid." Manufacturers that have significant OEM traction for a new product don't need to do retrofits to strut their stuff. Manufacturers who don't have significant traction build an LC Super Hybrid or retrofit a BMW sedan.


    No matter what, it shows that they're deeply concerned with the DCA challenge and their ability to come up with a competitive product.


    The big trade was impressive. Since we didn't have a couple days of massive reported short selling it was almost certainly a buy that probably took a few days for the MM to fill. Any time an investor steps up with a purchase that big, he's done some very serious homework. It's a little too early for the fun, but once bigger buyers start moving into a stock they tend to start bragging to their buddies at the club which brings in other comparable buyers.


    All things being equal, I think it was a wonderful day for Axion.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:33 PM Reply Like
  • JP, Do you read anything into the 2016/2017 statements in the pr? Would JCI have an idea about BMW's or anyone else's timeline? Or is JCI just speculating that their $1200 solution wont be needed for a few more years.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:45 PM Reply Like
  • I have to believe they're anticipating the same kind of lengthy testing and validation process as the one Axion's been enduring. Theirs will undoubtedly take less time because they have more experience with the process, but OEMs are OEMs and they're not going to put an entirely new technology under the hood of their cars without testing it to death.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:51 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist: "... someone who wanted to dump".


    Thinking about John's comment about a few days, there's another scenario that might fit - an MM having to accumulate over several days from many smaller sellers. Buying from the owning broker's customers over several days would generate no short sales. VWAP would only have to be <= to the large customer's price point. Final sale of those accumulated shares to the owning broker's customer would also generate no short sales. Inter and intra-broker trades would be most likely to generate no short sales


    OTOH, if the MM had to buy from other than an owning-broker's customers, there's likely short sales (from the selling MMs).


    1/6 close was $0.306 and we went to a close of $0.3708 on 1/14, the day before the big sale.


    1/7-1/15 short volume was ~680.39K - relatively close to the big transaction size.


    There's probably a mix of those two scenarios that went on.


    So, over a week or so beginning 1/7 (first big volume day) we see rising price - buying pressure, combinations of big short sales and near-zero short sales, volume down and then back up.


    I suspect there wasn't one big seller. I suspect today volume and short sales will begin to return to normal behavior *unless* there's more anxious buyers already awaiting fulfilment of their buy orders.


    No way to know, of course, but fun to try and figure it out - the game never ends.


    17 Jan 2013, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    As much as I try to follow youy MarketMaker logic, it appears to me, that you always have the MM taking a risk and purchasing the stock. If your saying a MMs customer ordered 700,000 shares at .35 and the MM accumulated those I don't buy it. I can't see the MM accumulating for 2 weeks, but one never knows. Anyway you have been following there actions much more than I. I just look and always try to factor out the risk for them.


    So far the low volume today suggests I could be right. There are few sellers and less buyers in the market. All are waiting and watching for an announcement.
    Of course the buyers might be waiting for a CC. Thats always good to lower the price :-)
    17 Jan 2013, 10:40 AM Reply Like
  • It could also have been a matched trade. You see those in a couple of different circumstances. When a big holder wants to sell but doesn't want to pressure the market he can go looking for a buyer that will take him out in a single transaction. Another variant you see from time to time is when a family of funds wants to move stock from one fund to another. In either case the trade would show as a single print that wouldn't impact short sales.
    17 Jan 2013, 10:54 AM Reply Like
  • JP,


    Do you read anything into the recent volume being significant? It almost feels like something is happening or maybe the paint is just drying quicker nowadays. Not sure what it means but normally volume is a good thing absent bad news. Hopefully we can have another 600K+ plus day (that would make 5 in a row and a record).
    17 Jan 2013, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • The 10-day average volume is at 661,500 and will climb again today. If you look at the volume chart that's pretty rarified air for Axion. Like many around here, I've always lived by the mantra that price follows volume and I think January 2013 is shaping up to look a lot like February 2011, with no big uglies standing by to take away the punch bowl.
    17 Jan 2013, 12:43 PM Reply Like
  • New Cadillac :
    16 Jan 2013, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • LT, I like how they keep raising the door heights and playing with the roof lines so you can't see s&*t around the A and C pillars. I read an article awhile ago about this because it really screws up safety and creature comfort. The response was that the industry recognizes that styling sells cars and it looks better.
    16 Jan 2013, 06:21 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: pull out your trusty shotgun kill the flock of birds and you won't have to worry about "see s&*t around the A and C pillars".




    There's probably a good youtube that's appropriate, but I'm lazy and pushed ATM.


    16 Jan 2013, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • OK HTL. I'll roll up the windows first. Or should I shoot first then roll up the windows.( I just know I'm gonna get this sequence of operations wrong.) :(
    17 Jan 2013, 09:15 AM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: Just make sure the operational end is pointed the right direction - you're irreplaceable for both of us!


    17 Jan 2013, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks HTL. Pull on the trigger don't push! Very good advice. ;)


    Not that the birds appreciate it.


    BTW, Looks like the mm's are fishing again. Just threw out a baited hook at .3506 USD. Today is going to be interesting. Not that the last few were not.


    Oops, There's our 2500 share mm order jumping into the fray. :)
    17 Jan 2013, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • Not to muddy the waters, but I added a very short-term trend line, low of 1/10 to low of 1/16 (credibility possible due to extension to the left aligns with some prior highs where it acted as resistance) that now (potentially) acts as support and suggests we should break above the resistance of the rising trading channel we (I?) have been yacking about.


    But it's *very* early in its development, including today so far, only three touches.


    EDIT: With CDEL, ATDF and maybe TEJS jacking their bids up this early, might see it today. But that would be an unexpected move this soon.
    17 Jan 2013, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • Just traded above the trading channel resistance - can it hold?


    17 Jan 2013, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • pennant formation in the works?
    17 Jan 2013, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • over what time period are you charting?
    17 Jan 2013, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist: Mathieu or me?


    17 Jan 2013, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • Curious as to how Mathieu saw a pennant.
    17 Jan 2013, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist: On a short-term chart, the highs of the last few days and lows are making the early moves that would make a pennant if trend lines are added.


    Short-term continuation is what it suggests.


    With $0.37, apparently acting as today's resistance (thus far), there's a good chance.


    My recently added one I mentioned is the bottom line.


    17 Jan 2013, 11:15 AM Reply Like
  • Well,
    $.37 didn't hold long.
    I think $.35 looks like a longer term support line as it was resistance back in May and June. B ut I just don't think the rules hold as true on microcaps that trade this thin.
    Someday soon maybe a chart that looks like a spacex rocket ship blasting off.
    17 Jan 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist: $0.37 was one of my projected resistance points. Expected behavior comforts me.


    Edit: Trading right now right on that rising channel resistance AFAICT. If it holds, that's a positive indication.
    17 Jan 2013, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • OK,
    I get what your seeing. I like this area as support. For the last year there has been resistance and support at this level. If we rise the next level of resistance would be the $.46 mark. After that if we crack $.67 its spacex.
    A product sale announcement could really help get rid of a lot of these " ifs".
    17 Jan 2013, 11:40 AM Reply Like
  • i was looking at less than 2 weeks action, daily bars. HTL all over it.
    17 Jan 2013, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • A quote from TG's Oct. 3, 2012 Letter to Shareholders:


    "The transportation market is a primary focus for us – especially micro-hybrid cars and battery-powered locomotives. In those areas we are working with Norfolk Southern, BMW, a large US-based car company and other automotive OEMs."

    16 Jan 2013, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • 200 and three Followers now.
    16 Jan 2013, 08:18 PM Reply Like
  • Mr I
    DrRich is one of them. :-)
    17 Jan 2013, 04:17 AM Reply Like
  • I found this line in the JCI presentation interesting.


    Micro Hybrid applications will require a “non-lead-acid” energy storage solution


    Wonder if they are thinking that AGM (or PbC) would be too bulky/heavy?


    It also looks like they want to move toward a one battery solution by 2020, so maybe they feel AGM or PbC can't be a one battery solution?
    16 Jan 2013, 08:26 PM Reply Like
  • JCI owns a lithium-ion battery plant you could walk through with an Uzi without running the risk of injuring a human. They want to sell a "better mousetrap." Only time will tell if the auto industry is interested.


    Think about it for a minute.


    A micro-hybrid uses a 1 to 2 kW starter generator to save up to 15%.


    A mild hybrid like the LaCrosse uses a 15 kW motor generator.


    JCI is in their pitching an expensive 8 to 10 kW solution, and effectively admitting that their AGM products aren't good enough for the 1 to 2 kW starter generator market.

    16 Jan 2013, 08:44 PM Reply Like
  • If the 787 continues to have battery problems, Li-on could get a black eye.
    16 Jan 2013, 09:04 PM Reply Like
  • JCI is rolling this new solution out, but at the same time trumpeting that they will have something like an AGM capacity of 6 million units this year in the US.


    I ask the question again, if AGM will not be sufficient, what are they building all the additional AGM capacity for?
    16 Jan 2013, 09:59 PM Reply Like
  • Stephan:


    The answer is marketing.


    Companies sell crap all the time if they are able to get away with it.


    PbC is way below the radar. Li-ion and AGM are all the outside world know about, and the companies that sell that crap are going to milk them for all they're worth.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:09 PM Reply Like
  • >Stefan Moroney ... AGM LA batteries are a direct "drop-in" upgrade to VRLA for traditional OEM & aftermarket. For Start/Stop it is the best available technology, rivaled only by Lithium Ion in performance, at OEM price points, scale & validation.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:19 PM Reply Like
  • You nailed it, JP.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:24 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan, remember an AGM line could be for batteries with lead or carbon electrodes.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:20 PM Reply Like
  • I know :)
    16 Jan 2013, 11:52 PM Reply Like
  • Here is the best ad yet for forgetting about Li-ion batteries in motive applications:

    16 Jan 2013, 09:13 PM Reply Like
  • I was thinking this one had the most pithy headline:



    And this one is from a gawker site, where more than likely not a few EV-fan eyeballs often hang out..



    "The in-flight Japanese battery incident followed an earlier 787 battery incident that occurred on the ground in Boston on January 7, 2013. The AD is prompted by this second incident involving a lithium ion battery. The battery failures resulted in release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage, and smoke on two Model 787 airplanes. The root cause of these failures is currently under investigation. These conditions, if not corrected, could result in damage to critical systems and structures, and the potential for fire in the electrical compartment."


    I'm thankful for all the Li-ion batteries we have in our electronics, gadgets, and toys, but I'll admit they still give me a bit of pause, fire safety wise, even if that might not be fully justified. In any case, I hope their advances continue such that remaining hazards can eventually be all but vanquished...
    16 Jan 2013, 09:49 PM Reply Like
  • Wonder if Vani Dantam has offered PbCs as an alternative with supporting technical info.


    Also wonder if the large block sale today was in part a response to the steady bubbling up of Li-ion battery problems in different applications.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:05 PM Reply Like
  • PbC energy density (weight) is way too poor to be suitable for an airplane. Also, price is a very minor concern for commercial aviation - it's not autos.


    I have heard every incremental pound on a plane is tens of thousands of dollars of additional fuel expense over the plane's life.
    16 Jan 2013, 11:23 PM Reply Like
  • "PbC energy density (weight) is way too poor to be suitable for an airplane. Also, price is a very minor concern for commercial aviation ...."


    Understood, Rick. OTOH, safety is a prime concern, energy storage need (and density criticallity) is a function of application, and availability of greater energy density can be dependent on supporting peripheral systems (thermal and battery management systems). What is the weight penalty (if any) of an integrated PbC battery pack vs the integrated Li-ion battery pack system now in use? Or versus an integrated nimh battery pack, or lead-acid battery pack?
    17 Jan 2013, 01:01 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    <But if Boeing had to switch to more conventional nickel-cadmium or lead-acid batteries, they would have to be larger, adding more weight to the plane and cutting into the plane’s fuel-savings potential.>


    <Replacing batteries on the 787 with different ones, like metal hydride batteries, is theoretically possible but would be costly, said Hans J. Weber, the president of Tecop International, an aviation consulting firm.
    He estimated that different batteries could double the weight of the current systems and would be twice the size.
    “It’s not trivial, but it could be done,” Mr. Weber said. >


    Size is also a factor.
    17 Jan 2013, 04:07 AM Reply Like
  • Rick: LoL! When I first read the line I thought it said "... every excremental pound ...". I guess I need that second cup of coffee before the market opens.


    17 Jan 2013, 07:49 AM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    LOL at your blurring vision. I'm looking for very small volume today. I'm a believer that the large supply should be gone now. But I have been so wrong before.
    17 Jan 2013, 08:05 AM Reply Like
  • I wonder if that will hold to be true for the 787?
    17 Jan 2013, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • I've dealt with two battery recalls so far with family owned devices. Since I didn't get the opportunity to suffer the bad side of the purpose for the recall they were, in my case, advantageous. Got new batteries for well worn ones. Not that it's worth the risk but in hind sight mind you.


    But they are perfectly safe,,,,yup they are. (I'll let someone else field test the big ones.)
    17 Jan 2013, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • My 2 cents worth:
    I think that JCI building a retrofit on a "BMW" not a chevy or ford was a direct shot at AXPW. Also the timeline of two years (i believe he said they could do it in a "couple of years")
    There is no doubt that AGM won't do it. I just hope the "lead" batteries are referring to their own & that the PbC is the competition that BMW is pushing on suppliers.
    To have a "working" system tells me they have been subtly working on this for a couple of years & they are telling the industry we have a competitive solution.
    To sum it up, JCI gave a competitive solution, a price, & a time line.
    and aimed it straight at us.
    16 Jan 2013, 09:56 PM Reply Like
  • I haven't looked at the specs yet, but the recent Ford announcement that lithium batteries will be used in their new hybrid is concerning. No news of recent testing that proves the safety of the batteries. No mention of lithium problems at all. Only an announcement that lithium is being used.


    Sometimes the lessons of the past ( Ford Pinto) are not learned, only repeated.


    I'm curious as to what our ever present retired litigator ( and government document sleuth) has to say about this issue.
    16 Jan 2013, 10:05 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist - I would say that it depends on if lithium ion, or the way they set it up in the car, is per se defective for this use. If yes then I would say would be a big legal problem. If not, then no (other than maybe an isolated legal issue). I dont think this has been determined yet, but I'd say with apple laptop fires and now plane issues, something is amiss.


    17 Jan 2013, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • We missed you Brishwain. Welcome back old friend.
    17 Jan 2013, 03:12 PM Reply Like
  • I can't imagine more rigorous testing than Boeing did with the Dreamliner. Ford will have to take a second look at this.
    And we really don't want to forget the lithium battery that exploded at the National Safety Board Testing center. Although it seems many OEMs have forgotten
    17 Jan 2013, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • Frost & Sullivan just sent the following e-mail out to the press:


    "All Boeing 787's are grounded as a result of overheating batteries and has created multiple concerns as to all of the components within the lithium battery systems utilized. The "battery system" includes the batteries (packs) themselves that could be leaking, or the battery cells that are combined to constitute a battery pack. Other components include the battery management system (BMS) which is in place to monitor the overall health and status of the battery system, such as monitoring and regulating voltage and safe guarding against over charging. It has yet to be determined which of these components has failed and is thus responsible for these recent events.


    According to Frost & Sullivan Research Analyst Wesley Dean, the implications of the eventual determination of the responsible component has the potential of significant negatively impacting existing, converging and emerging industries employing this battery technology. This is especially concerning for those industries and applications recently gaining traction in transitioning from more traditional and proven battery chemistry solutions such as lead acid, nickel cadmium (NiCd) and nickel metal hydride (NiMH) to lithium based solutions. Examples include electric vehicles and back up power solutions (especially those associated with expensive and sensitive hardware such as in telecom and data center applications).


    The reality is that lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) is used most frequently in electronics which require high energy density but lower power density. It is the LiCoO2 configuration that Boeing has selected and GS Yuasa has supplied. It provides increased energy density in foregoing greater safety characteristics. Other chemistries provide much higher power density with lower energy density. Some examples are lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4/ LFP) or lithium manganese spinel. However this distinction is often not recognized by the average consumer as consumers are typically aware, simply of "lithium batteries" There is no awareness or even the perceived need to understand the variations of lithium chemistries, or the applications associated with these variations.


    "It is this lack of distinction that threatens lithium chemistries as a whole and the strides that have been made in reducing battery costs. Such reductions are largely dependent upon increased volumes and economies of scale, " said Dean. "As the cost of batteries is often the most expensive component for certain applications, increasing the number of viable applications for various lithium battery chemistries is viewed by many as the main hurdle to clear in terms of making lithium based products more affordable over more traditional alternatives by way of achieving economies of scale."


    Please contact me if you would like to connect with Wesley Dean for an interview."
    17 Jan 2013, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • JP, you indicated a while back that BMW presented at the ELBC 13 on a dual-battery flooded LAB + lithium-ion architecture that they had done vehicle testing on. I realize it's not the same system as JCI is talking about, because you mentioned that the lithium battery BMW tested was 14-volts. Nonetheless, the JCI news reminded me of your earlier report. Would it be possible for you to post the BMW presentation for us to take a look at?
    16 Jan 2013, 11:28 PM Reply Like
    17 Jan 2013, 05:59 AM Reply Like
  • great piece. thanks!
    17 Jan 2013, 08:25 AM Reply Like
  • I appreciate it, John - thanks.
    17 Jan 2013, 09:23 AM Reply Like
  • Interesting presentation. And I note that it describes the small lead acid cranking battery as an AGM rather than a cheaper alternative.


    Would this be similar to how a lead acid/lead carbon structure would be or are there tangible differences?
    17 Jan 2013, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • I don't see any particular reason to upgrade to AGM for the starter battery if you have PbC or lithium for the hotel loads, but that's really a decision for the automakers.
    17 Jan 2013, 10:31 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan,
    But do note that here the AGM is not intended for use *solely* as starter battery:
    From slide 14: "The lithium ion battery supplies the major part of the needed energy during the engine off phase and reduces the cycle load of the lead-acid battery" - this means that the AGM supplies the 'minor' part of the needed energy (confirmed by the diagram).
    17 Jan 2013, 10:51 AM Reply Like