Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

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

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

Comments (294)
Track new comments
  • European time advantage again.
    18 Aug 2013, 08:22 AM Reply Like
  • WoW ! Can it be? #2 ?


    Whooooooo- Hooooooo !


    SWMBO points out I lag Europeans. I point out my square jaw.
    18 Aug 2013, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • Charmed?


    The end of the Fiscal year is fast approaching. Monday will be interesting.
    18 Aug 2013, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • 261

    18 Aug 2013, 10:26 AM Reply Like
  • Nobody's touched on it, and I waited a while before deciding to mention, but notice that the latest 7/31 semi-monthly short position on (AXPW) is essentially flat. Considering everything, this is now unlikely just some artifact of market-makers and T+3 settlements. It's also unlikely to be the result of mechanics of processing the new shares being issued, IMO.



    I commented a while back in one of my EOD posts that there were reasons we might see evidence of cessation of short position increases. I don't remember what I said (un?)fortunately, so I'll have to make time to dig.


    18 Aug 2013, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks for reminding me that the 7/31 short interest was out. While I can't figure out how they borrowed stock, I think the bi-monthly reports represent "real shorts" while the daily FINRA numbers include both real shorts and "clearing shorts," a term I just made up to describe sales where the stockholder owns the shares he's selling, but has to comply with additional back-office procedures before actual delivery is good delivery.
    18 Aug 2013, 12:00 PM Reply Like
  • Is your made up term similar to "shorting against the box" strategy employed by hedge funds and pe shops?


    Would they be able to borrow on the premise of being guaranteed to be able to cover by next month, and are selling in advance, thus increasing the irr?
    18 Aug 2013, 09:05 PM Reply Like
  • Shorting against the box used to be a common tax deferral tactic where a holder could sell appreciated shares in a short transaction without triggering a tax impact until he closed the short by covering from the box.



    Since the benefits of shorting against the box were eliminated in 1997, I don't think it's a common practice any more.
    18 Aug 2013, 10:01 PM Reply Like
  • shorting against the box still works you just have to set up three different entities, one owns the shares, another borrows and shorts and one entity owns both of those entities., when you unwind the second entity covers, the first sells, and the master entity has achieved the goal. I meant this type of structure might be able to accomplish something similar here...Any chance Axiom would have had to deposit shares in advance into an account, similar to escrow, that the other entities are able to short against?
    18 Aug 2013, 10:43 PM Reply Like
  • I haven't seen any contract provisions that require anything beyond direct stock issuances to the PIPErs on the scheduled dates. When you recall that the number of "real short" shares represent less than 1/5 of the shares issuable to the PIPErs every month, it is something different but it's not worth much thought time because it's so immaterial.
    19 Aug 2013, 04:30 AM Reply Like
  • Another puzzle piece for the future.


    Conti makes light work of electric vacuum pumps


    "Conti's head of vacuum pump development, Michael Juerging, said: “An electric vacuum pump can eliminate between 1.4 and 1.8g/km CO2 compared to a mechanical vacuum pump. Since it does not rely on the engine, it can provide a vacuum even if the engine is switched off as part of a stop-start function.”"

    18 Aug 2013, 10:36 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks for reference, iind.


    Wonder what the power requirement(s) of the vacuum pump is. Also now pondering the electric power requirement(s) for other equipment such as power steering, power brakes, engine system cooling fan, etc.
    18 Aug 2013, 01:01 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv, Generally these metrics are not shared in these top level public announcements. We do however know that the automotive companies were already struggling to meet the electrical demands of all the things they and their customers want to stuff into a vehicle including plug in auxiliary devices. I think a broad roll out of many of these features has to be looking toward the split 48/12 VDC architecture. Not in all cases for sure and it will be phased in as usual to minimize risk.
    18 Aug 2013, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • Hi DI,
    Most power brakes have a vacuum booster, I haven't seen a hydraulic pump for brakes for years. The last one I saw was on a 1960s C60 Chevy truck. Not sure about the anti-lock brake hydraulics however..
    18 Aug 2013, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed: I haven't checked for *decades*, but I'm thinking most of those use manifold vacuum to "charge" the vacuum tank. If so, not many, relatively, electrical vacuum pumps out there yet.


    I'm aware that on super/turbo-charged vehicles there may be issues that have to be considered and planned for, so maybe more than I think. I'd guess for those the easiest is either a conventional hydraulic boost from a belt-driven pump (unlikely?) or an electric pump or direct boost?




    18 Aug 2013, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • Re: electric vacuum pumps in autos


    Would it be cheaper just to electrically boost the brakes directly? If you could arrange to have the alternator driven from the wheels, the energy needed could be partially replaced by the alternator in real time.


    Still, engine vacuum is "free" in "foot off the gas" mode and diaphragm type force generators for brake boosting are very cheap in "Detroit quantities". So is a low pressure "vacuum holder".
    18 Aug 2013, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    I worked for Chrysler in the late 80s and early 90s. We had a service bulletin on the 2.2L turbo engines having to do with the brake vacuum reservoir. If the car experienced braking or a pedal drop at a stop we replaced the reservoir ( a small round plastic elbow with a check valve inside that is pushed into the booster grommet)) with a slightly larger one, it did fix the problem and was an easy, quick fix.
    18 Aug 2013, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed: A true example of "bigger is better". I had no idea how much "vacuum" could be held in a given size.


    Ahem. Since I was habitually driving in a "spirited" fashion in my '84 Daytona Turbo, I was thinking of what happened in extended periods of pedal to the metal driving where the turbo was constantly spun up.


    BTW, great little car except for the tranny. Broke quite a few as they apparently used the non-turbo tranny in the car.


    Problem cured when I installed an '86 transmission. It was stronger. It also had a slightly lower ("longer") gear ratio, allowing more MPH in 1st gear. Counter-intuitively, that gave a better 0-60 time as only one shift was needed, more than offsetting the acceleration loss from the "taller" gears.


    I had already installed the racing struts, springs and shocks from Mopar (did it all by my lonesome too!), which dropped the car a couple of inches and gave me the handling and "feel" I preferred. Some folks might have considered the ride a bit "stiff".


    If it would have had an inter-cooler, might have been really something and it was pretty good even with boost limit of ~7 lbs on a 2.2 liter engine. IIRC, later models with it allowed a boost of ~12 lbs?


    I sold the care to my mechanic in 1997, IIRC, and it was still strong.


    18 Aug 2013, 02:44 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    Sounds like a fun car. Those 2.2L and 2.5L turbo engines were great.
    Very dependable as long as the cooling system was properly cared for and the car was idled to allow the turbo feed oil to cool before shut down (continuous hot turbo shutdown would eventually plug the turbo oil tube with sludge causing failure). I did change a few head gaskets due to a lack of cooling system maintenance.
    18 Aug 2013, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, As Stilldazed suggests reservoirs with check valves are often used to assure vacuum is available as a steady state power source for the functions that require it.


    On many vehicles vacuum is also utilized for directing air flow for zoned HVAC. The functions where you direct air between feet, midsection and windshield (windscreen for the Brits).


    So getting to SiHB's point I guess the decision to electrify functions like vacuum or brakes depends on a number of factors in the vehicle. For a bunch of small movements like under the dash board I have to guess that a bunch of vacuum lines and little pneumatic actuators would be cheaper than a bunch of small motors and associated wiring. But maybe not depending on other factors in the vehicle.


    Decisions also have to be made to make sure you maintain the volumes to assure you can achieve the economies of scale SiHB alludes to. Just because something is cheaper for 1 unit doesn't mean it's cheaper for a million. I used to work hard on "component set strategies" to make sure things fit not only the function for the vehicle but also within the manufacturing strategies to optimize existing and future capacities. Things can get very expensive when you build millions of something in high volume but the next application you need to support requires X more than your available capacity if it's highly automated. All needs to be managed years in advance before it's on the shelf for you and me.
    18 Aug 2013, 03:08 PM Reply Like
  • ii,
    On my end, doing diagnostics and R and R work, I was stunned at how complicated the vehicles had become and the wealth of knowledge/engineering required to build and repair them ( the Imperial had nine separate computers that cross talked and a standard car had at least four). I remember how surprised we were when the Viper and the Prowler were released so quickly with so few problems. We had no real idea at the time of the massive man hours required before and during start up, but did recognize that it was a complicated procedure. With the knowledge you have passed on here, I wonder that anything gets accomplished in a short (3-5 year) time period.
    18 Aug 2013, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed, It's absolutely amazing the technology that goes into a vehicle. I still remember when they were putting the first microprocessors in cars. Tons of problems due to the harsh environment (weather, thermo-cycling and electrical transients).


    Now you have to be a specialist in very specific sub systems because it's near impossible to understand all the things going on.
    Modern luxury vehicles claimed to feature more software than a fighter jet.

    I remember flying back from Detroit and having a wonderful discussion with a young engineer sitting in the seat next to me. He was finishing up work on the audio system for the Viper and was in need of a follow on job. As things progress I learned about the position he would be interviewing for and the name of the engineering manager that would be interviewing him. I had worked years earlier for the engineering manager so I gave him as much input as I could and asked him to please say hello for me. ;-D
    18 Aug 2013, 04:13 PM Reply Like
  • Left coast S1 hybrid figures from GCC.


    Hybrids take 7% of California market in 1H 2013; PHEVs 0.7%; EVs 1.1%

    18 Aug 2013, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Impossible material with world record breaking surface area made by Swedish researchers
    18 Aug 2013, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • "A Thursday afternoon in 2011, we slightly changed the synthesis parameters of the earlier employed unsuccessful attempts, and by mistake left the material in the reaction chamber over the weekend. Back at work on Monday morning we discovered that a rigid gel had formed and after drying this gel we started to get excited, says Johan Goméz de la Torre."


    And by mistake is my favorite line, which I see often in some publicly shared R & D stuff. Sometimes the boarders are crossed by mistake. But you also need the experts to recognize that they were wrong. Yet damn smart when they utilize the trash that shouldn't be discarded.


    The tinkerers still find some of the great things that advantage us all.
    19 Aug 2013, 12:17 AM Reply Like
  • "In the fields of observation chance favors only the prepared mind"
    Louis Pasteur
    19 Aug 2013, 04:06 AM Reply Like
  • Nicu, Very fitting. Thanks.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:40 AM Reply Like
  • Wireless devices go battery-free with new communication technique
    Aug 13, 2013 by Michelle Ma


    < ( —We might be one step closer to an Internet-of-things reality. University of Washington engineers have created a new wireless communication system that allows devices to interact with each other without relying on batteries or wires for power.


    The new communication technique, which the researchers call "ambient backscatter," takes advantage of the TV and cellular transmissions that already surround us around the clock. ....>
    18 Aug 2013, 09:18 PM Reply Like
  • fro ... that wireless system qualifies as a geewhizer!
    19 Aug 2013, 12:22 AM Reply Like
  • some big buyers!!!
    19 Aug 2013, 09:38 AM Reply Like
  • Hello, hello, anybody out there? Wow, sure is quiet around here! Did somebody shut the lights out, is the party is over and nobody told me?


    Just when Axion is starting its new long term up trend too!
    19 Aug 2013, 01:26 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun, Maybe they are all at dealerships? Or out buying marshmallows for the drive there just in case?


    BMW Recall: 2009-10 BMW X5 XDrive35d Vehicles Called Back Over Fire, Battery Issue

    19 Aug 2013, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • Just trying to stay calm to minimize my carbon emissions.
    19 Aug 2013, 01:44 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun357,
    After the whole Rick-JP blow-up this past weekend, I would imagine that there are a few who are stewing over the incident and finding other things to do with their time for awhile. IMHO.


    Either that, or maybe they are so mesmerized by the fact that the stock is up a penny today, that they don't dare take their eyes off their monitors long enough to type anything, in case they would miss something.
    19 Aug 2013, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • New JCI presentation



    The new vice chairman (formerly VP of the battery biz) will outline his strategies and expectations for Johnson Controls at the
    annual Johnson Controls New York Analyst Day, December 18, 2013
    19 Aug 2013, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • Wouldn't it be interesting if JCI was the contractor that was holding up the NS-999 completion? They do provide the types of things that are needed to complete the project. They also would benefit from Axion being able to be bought up cheap.
    19 Aug 2013, 02:07 PM Reply Like
  • We will have to keep a lookout for JCI filing SEC 13-F or 13-G forms. That would register their intentions, if any. Pity about the 90 day gap.
    19 Aug 2013, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • >greentongue ... When it comes to batteries for trains, there are really only 2 American companies to consider. East Penn and, the gorilla, Enersys. Johnson Controls isn't even a bump in the supply chain, if they are even to be found.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:27 PM Reply Like
  • Welp, Tom Konrad did say there was potential for explosive growth. ;)
    19 Aug 2013, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • Ha, now those are all good possibilities!


    I know I have been finding myself in a state of wonder over the data that was provided last Thursday. After reading the statement by TG several times regarding "significant orders" and "you will be hearing from us soon" I had to sit back and attempt to understand just what that could exactly mean beside what it actually appears to mean. What I have determined is that I am expecting to hear significant orders soon! That amazing realization has caused me to start buying back some shares at these lower prices that I shed a little while ago. Once those press releases start to appear this story will become real interesting! I must admit that I still have not regained total confidence and trust in TG and I am very anxious for that to be resolved! I am just wondering what "soon" means to TG as I know what it means to me and it is not November!
    19 Aug 2013, 02:05 PM Reply Like
  • @RBrun --- RE: "I had to sit back and attempt to understand just what that could exactly mean beside what it actually appears to mean."


    You cynic you, LOL. --- Thanks for the good belly laugh!
    19 Aug 2013, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • For clarity. From the SA transcript.


    "Thomas Granville - Chairman, Chief Executive Officer


    Thank you. And thanks again for taking the time to listen to the Axion story. We expect to have a new member of the team – an important member of the team in place on our next call. I never promised orders on a timetable basis before. But, I will predict that we will have significant orders to talk about on our next earning call.


    We are looking forward to our Annual Meeting to our new CFO, to reporting new sales and to the growth and success of Axion Power. Thanks. You will be hearing from us soon."
    19 Aug 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • Soon...? I didn't hear him say soon. All I heard was that we were going to hear about significant sales in the next cc. Obviously, that means that it should happen this quarter, but when is another matter all together. If within 3 months is what you call soon, then keep on buying back your shares ;)
    19 Aug 2013, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • Karima,


    "Soon...? I didn't hear him say soon. All I heard was that we were going to hear about significant sales in the next cc. Obviously, that means that it should happen this quarter, but when is another matter all together. If within 3 months is what you call soon, then keep on buying back your shares ;)"


    The very last statement was "You will be hearing from us soon." TG stated that we would be talking about the orders in the next CC but my take is that we should be seeing announcements of those sales "soon". They are certainly not going to wait to announce an actual sale until the CC.
    19 Aug 2013, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • RB,


    Placing my marker on mystery man #4 . He should appear shortly. Don't know when the rest of the nation starts school, but here in Virginia ( the Valley, anyway) school starts next Monday. Some start the following Tuesday. All the heavyweights will return to work, decisions will be made, and we'll get an order.


    That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :>)


    Still think it'll be a new guy we don't see coming.
    19 Aug 2013, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • VW,


    I like how you think, I can not wait for the day when this board is buzzing with excitement about the press release that changes the atmosphere around here. I feel it coming "soon"!


    Truth is that it will only take one "significant" order to get this soon to be next chapter in the story of Axion leaving puberty started.


    I love this part of the story where the R&D company is ready for reproduction of little PbC batteries!
    19 Aug 2013, 09:40 PM Reply Like
  • Nice to see Axion made the International Lead Association news page.


    Lead-based batteries to be used in energy-saving hybrid electric truck project


    "ALABC President, Dr David Wilson, added: “It is good to see an ALABC member performing strongly. The new generation of lead-based batteries could help achieve significant improvements in the fuel efficiency of the heavy trucking industry.”"

    19 Aug 2013, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • >iindelco ... Nice to finally have the industry take notice ... even if they can't spell the customer's name correctly. I guess close is better than nothing.
    19 Aug 2013, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • Nice find iin!
    19 Aug 2013, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Good article. A couple of concentrators back, there was speculation of e power going public and which stock would you buy. I'd like both, thank you, and I think e-power's symbol should be expw (x for axion batteries because it is such an integral part). We would then just need 3 more companies that rely on axion ---i..o and u. (tongue firmly in cheek), but wouldn't be bad!!
    19 Aug 2013, 03:45 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: Hm, methinks that other ALABC members might have an interest in licensing or a JV so they can participate? I might just drive over to Durham and hit them with a 2x4 cluebat!


    It's too early to speculate, but better early than never! ;-))


    19 Aug 2013, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • HTL, I like your little twist on the phrase! :oD
    19 Aug 2013, 04:19 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,


    " I might just drive over to Durham and hit them with a 2x4 cluebat!"


    Let me know if you need a driver for the getaway car! ;-)
    19 Aug 2013, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • Shotgun!
    19 Aug 2013, 06:44 PM Reply Like
  • The unknown is the meaning of 'significant'. Going from 1x34 battery truck a month to 2 is a 100% increase. A on-time cube of 1000 or so, is the same as a train. Recurring orders are the best.


    I mentioned to an antenna guy a long time ago that there was this company who was going to sell a satellite TV through an 18 inch receiver. He talked for an hour about how that was physically not possible. I was not prepared to argue with someone who has building antennas for 20 years, but dish satellite receivers are all over the place now. Sometimes you have to trust they've solved the problem, but don't want to tell all of their secrets.
    19 Aug 2013, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Voyager Becomes First Man-Made Object to Leave The Solar System


    Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 launched just weeks apart in 1977 to "study Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptue" according to After completing its studies, the two probes kept flying toward interstellar space.


    Voyager 1 is about 11.6 billion miles from Earth, and Voyager 2 is 9.4 billion miles away.
    19 Aug 2013, 03:21 PM Reply Like
  • froggey, Captain Kirk will find it in just a few years. I expect it'll make a great movie.


    What I find a fun speculation is that space travel will progress and we'll get better at it and one day we'll send out a probe that will pass Voyagers 1&2 on its way out to Who-Knows-Where.
    19 Aug 2013, 03:46 PM Reply Like
  • VW
    I wonder when we can invest in that Enterprise? :-)
    19 Aug 2013, 04:41 PM Reply Like
  • There is still approximately $2.8M in inventories on the books.


    Any thoughts on how much cash flow that would bring the company when converted to finished goods and sold?
    19 Aug 2013, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • In the battery business materials and components (a/k/a inventory) typically run 60% to 75% of finished product cost on the loading dock.
    19 Aug 2013, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • John - a couple random questions.


    So based on your 60-75% range, I would guesstimate revenues to the company of $3.92M to $3.5M from the aforementioned inventories?


    Did the PIPE have any effect on the reduction in cash flow for the first six months of 2013 to $2.7M as opposed to $4.3M for the first six months of 2012?


    Is it a correct statement to say that average cash burn for each the first two quarters of 2013 was (2.7/2) or $1.35M? And can we expect that level of burn going forward?


    So if there are in fact "significant orders" on the horizon, it would appear converting the full amount of inventory would add a little more than 2 qtrs of runway room?


    Edit: At this point, what I want to see most is a credible path to break even numbers to give the large projects more time to mature without bleeding the company away through another PIPE.
    19 Aug 2013, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan -


    The problem is the current inventory level is remarkly consistent over the past few years. We've had inventory levels at this stage since Q2 2011. My normal methodology is to buy in 1/3s and I bought my first slug in Spring 2011. Then the Q2 2011 report inventory went from $2.2M in inventory to $3.0M in inventory with a large increase in Finished goods, increased by $.5M along with almost $.4M in Service revenue. Normal prudence would have me purchase another 1/3 at that point with the final third upon confirmation of sales. Instead I bought the remaining 2/3 and bought another slug after Q3 2011 expecting BMW anyday. Still waiting.


    Also, I've always assumed a chunk of that inventory is for the toll battery contract. Last year in Q4 when inventory moved from WIP to finished goods and then the clarification that electrodes in situ would be labeled as WIP and not finished I assume that the vast majority of the finished inventory is related to the toll contract with East Penn. For the past 5 quarters its averaged about $300k and therefore I assume there is an equal amount in raw inventory and WIP, maybe a little more for that contract (maybe more). Another way to look at it is assume the amounts in q4 2012 and q1 2013 are consistent with prior and the change in WIP were electrodes for PbC ($1.4M) and that tells you that there is $.4M in WIP for toll. So using $.3M for raw, $.4M for WIP, and $.3M for finished goods lets me estimate that there is $1.0M in inventory for the toll contact, leaving $1.8M for the PbC of which they have $1.4M in situ and $.4M probably in raw materials.


    I'm looking forward to any release from AXPW and expect it but I expect it to be another one time event. Which is why I think the market goes meh. Show us a contract over time and I think the market moves differently.
    Last comment for me. I felt bad for TG doing 100% of the talk on the call but that is his fault. If he's reading this which I hope he isn't if you don't have your CFO have someone else. Have Vani or where is Philip Baker. Why not have the COO and explain the benefits of the continous roll carbon sheeting? A new release was published so clearly they think its important, explain why.
    19 Aug 2013, 04:51 PM Reply Like
  • I think a revenue estimate in the $3.5 to $4 million range is pretty safe for a complete inventory turn.


    There are a half dozen different PIPE related entries in the Cash Flow statement but they tend to cancel each other out. The one big item that requires some assumptions is the $325,000 tax credit sale in Q2. Since we don't have any reason to believe that will be a recurring revenue stream it's probably safest to add it back in when estimating a burn rate going forward. To get a rough approximation of the cash numbers, I started with operating loss, rather than net loss, added the tax credit sale back in and then stripped out all the PIPE related items that weren't present in both years. For the six months that got me to a $2.9 million burn in 2013 compared to a $3.8 million burn in 2012. My best guess is that the million dollar difference is the cost reduction initiatives that Tom has regularly praised Chuck Trego for.


    The 10-Q says "We believe that the currently available funds ... will provide sufficient financial resources to fund our (operations) into the beginning of the third quarter of 2014. With that kind of express disclosure, it's way too early in the game to begin obsessing on future financing needs.


    If you want scary disclosure look at ZBB's last filing which said they can scrape through the fourth quarter of their fiscal year ended June 30, 2013 without additional funds.
    19 Aug 2013, 05:05 PM Reply Like
  • Voltage can be reduced through a transformer or some kind of reverse op-amp. I don't care if the Voltage coming in is 10^6, as long as it's reduced, and converted to higher current before it hits the battery terminal. That power converter may be may be one of the components that has become cheap enough for the e-power app to be affordable. I'd be more concerned about what to do when 100% SOC is reached. But that's E-Power's problem. I'm not going to sell Axion because I don't know the design details of one of their customers.


    Sometimes people need a justification to do what they want to do anyway. Hopefully there's no magic or smoke and mirrors. This is not a cold cold-fusion claim, where you really need extraordinary evidence to prove it. Just have third parties drive the truck.
    19 Aug 2013, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • Hmmm, No consistency in message from "The General". Err but you're putting it on the Malibu there Buck!


    GM Considering Start/Stop Technology for Next Corvette Stingray


    "General Motors considered start/stop technology for its 2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, but decided against it thinking it would "hurt the car's image.


    Despite this decision, the automaker isn't ruling out adding start/stop technology for its next Corvette.


    "It is more mass and more cost," Tadge Juechter, Corvette chief engineer, according to Edmunds. "It is very disconcerting to have your lively, great-sounding engine stall every time you come to a stop. The real customer value, the real environmental value is zero. So you are hauling around all that stuff to get a better label value (for mpg on the window sticker). It wasn't worth it.""


    "A bigger battery would be required if the company decided to go ahead with that plan however. Start/stop technology would bump up the vehicle's fuel economy approximately 2 mpg in the city."

    19 Aug 2013, 04:50 PM Reply Like
  • OT


    Tesla's a Threat to the Auto Industry, But Detroit's Reacting All Wrong

    19 Aug 2013, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • Test em in a lab first? Silly rabbit.


    British group to test battery-powered emu


    "A Greater Anglia class 379 emu built by Bombardier will be fitted with two types of battery: lithium (iron-manganese) phosphate and hot sodium nickel salt. However, the batteries will be tested in a laboratory before being installed on the train."

    19 Aug 2013, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • Sounds like a good candidate from a PcB battery. Too bad it doesn't come in Li-ion flavor.
    19 Aug 2013, 05:47 PM Reply Like
  • Greentongue, I have to wonder why we are not getting any bites. Are they afraid because of Axion's capitalization? Because it's not fully validated? What?
    19 Aug 2013, 05:56 PM Reply Like
  • Its the scary word "lead", guys.


    Its as if you had come up with a solution for world hunger, but one ingredient that HAD to be in the mix was "snail". Sure, it is a perfectly legitimate source of protein, but loads of people have an unreasonable aversion to it.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:08 PM Reply Like
  • I agree with TB, the main reason it hasn't been adopted is


    1. Lead, it's a four letter word.


    2. I have came to the conclusion that the battery does not fit as many apps as we hoped. It works where apps like the PC for load leveling or the rapid charge / discharge is needed. But for storage or long trips in an auto on all electric it doesn't have enough staying power. ePower sorta proved this on the gen-1 PbC, and AXPW probably knew it as they already had a better version ready to try.


    Failing the hotel load hurt badly. There are many apps that could use the tech, but for some reason AXPW hasn't tried.


    We have been told that many tried it or was listed as partners but the relationships failed to produce, that tells me probably only two things...either price or the battery did not meet the needs.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:41 PM Reply Like
  • Since they're talking about electrification "beyond the catenary" they'll definitely need an energy battery rather than a power battery. As near as I can tell from the article, they want to be able to run electric trains where there is no electricity source. It's effectively a very big EV application with a wide travel range.


    Given the PbC's bulk and weight, it really can't be competitive in that application. The NS 999 will run on pure battery power, but only within the confines of a rail yard where it will always be a short distance from a charging station. The OTR locomotive is an engine dominant system where the battery will only be used for acceleration boost, hill climbing and recuperative braking. The only thing it has in common with the UK experiment is two steel rails.
    19 Aug 2013, 08:08 PM Reply Like
  • Since I've been telling readers for the last five years that the PbC is a power battery that will never be suitable for things like EVs that need a long stable power discharge, I have a hard time believing that anybody on these concentrators hoped I had my facts wrong.


    I have no idea what you're talking about when you suggest that the PbC "failed the hotel load" because it's strength is carrying hotel loads that flooded and AGM batteries simply can't handle.


    Companies with unlimited budgets can chase every wild goose that comes into view. Those that don't have the time or money to go chasing white rabbits pick their market niches carefully and pursue them prudently so that they don't have to turn to the market for more money any more frequently than necessary.
    19 Aug 2013, 08:15 PM Reply Like
  • sorrry,,, I meant the airport test
    19 Aug 2013, 08:18 PM Reply Like
  • LT ... "the airport test" would certainly apply to consumer/business autos where the vehicle could be parked at airport/parking garage for days to weeks with the engine (and alternator) running to "top off" a battery charge. But a very wide range of possible applications do not appear to me as have an obvious "airport" parking performance requirement.


    Fleet operations appear to me as a much different type of service cycle with little "need" for a battery capable of passing "airport test." Class 8 trucking operations also appear very likely to have no need of a battery with slow self discharge. Neither is one apparent to me for hybrid industrial cranes, industrial forklifts, etc.


    If Axion has not pursued any of those applications I, for one would like to know why it has not. If Axion has pursued any of those applications and the PbC has been tried but did not measure up the public shareholder should be informed.
    19 Aug 2013, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • There has been speculation among Axionistas that the airport test might be a challenge for the PbC, but nobody has ever reported that the PbC did in fact fail. On my last visit to ePower a stack of PbCs that had been sitting on a pallet for 90 days registered 10 to 10.5 volts, which is well within the acceptable range after that length of time.


    You're taking idle conversation among stockholders and converting it into historic corporate fact.
    19 Aug 2013, 09:17 PM Reply Like
  • "On my last visit to ePower a stack of PbCs that had been sitting on a pallet for 90 days registered 10 to 10.5 volts, which is well within the acceptable range after that length of time."


    You accurately report that "nobody has ever reported that the PbC did in fact fail" the "airport test." Discussion of the "airport test" has relied on reasonable inference from purported self discharge of the PbC at a rate roughly double that of LABs. PbCs sitting on a pallet describes a number of batteries sitting on a platform. One might reasonably conclude from the description that the batteries are free standing. That is, "stack of PbCs ... sitting on a pallet" projects an image of a number of batteries standing on a pallet independent of connectors to other devices drawing or supplying current. If the SOC after 90 days registered 10 to 10.5 volts as you claim, then the PbC self discharge rate may not be enough in and of itself to prevent the battery from passing "the airport test."
    That leaves open the question of whether self discharge plus parasitic loads common to modern autos is enough for PbCs to fail the "airport test."


    Whatever actual facts apply to PbCs and "the airport test", the indisputable Axion historic corporate fact of note is Axion remains in search of a PbC buyer for purposes other than testing or prototype production (whether it meets "the airport test" or not).
    19 Aug 2013, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • Mileage Boosters Give Second Wind to Car-Parts Makers
    Engine TurboCharger, Start-Stop Battery Makers Gain New Sales, Profit as Auto Industry Seeks Improved Fuel-Economy

    20 Aug 2013, 01:32 AM Reply Like
  • John -


    If the airport test wasn't a problem, why did Axion switch to a two battery solution after a couple years of testing a one battery solution?




    "Whatever actual facts apply to PbCs and "the airport test", the indisputable Axion historic corporate fact of note is Axion remains in search of a PbC buyer for purposes other than testing or prototype production (whether it meets "the airport test" or not)."


    Always a bridesmaid never a bride ... Hopefully that will change soon.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:14 AM Reply Like
  • Axion has always been an advocate of the two-battery system because it's the most efficient path. Starter cables are heavy users of copper and have high internal resistance. From an efficiency and reliability perspective, they should be as short as possible, which favors a starter battery under the hood. While hotel loads are a bigger part of the total energy demand, they require less amperage and can get by with much lighter wiring.


    Tom mentioned that Axion was working on a one battery stop-start system for in a couple of conference calls, which indicates the airport test wasn't anywhere near the concern that some Axionistas envisioned.


    Axion's ultimate focus has always been second-generation micro-hybrids that will have continuously increasing accessory loads and relatively static starter loads. In those vehicles, a two battery system simply works better and gives the customer flexibility it can never have with a single battery.


    Wayne Gretzky said “A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.” Axion has always focused on being where the auto industry is going, instead of where it has been.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • Too bad Axion needs to be where the puck is today to stop blood letting. I don't think it can wait too much longer.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • I don't think our opinions matter one iota to the customers. They will follow their procedures and make their decisions in their own time. It may not be fun, but that's the way it is. Yesterday I pointed out that Axion has adequate financial resources to carry it into the third quarter of next year. While I suppose it is possible that nothing worthwhile will happen over the next year, that outcome strikes me as very unlikely given TG's promise of orders before the next CC, Norfolk Southern's talk of having the NS 999 on the road this year and ePower's potential to blow the trucking industry's mind within a couple months as it completes engine dominant series hybrid tractors for Class 8A and 8B.


    I regularly remind readers on my main pages articles that Tesla's stockholders are irrationally if not psychotically optimistic. Axion is the flip side of the same coin with stockholders that are irrationally if not psychotically pessimistic.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:56 AM Reply Like
  • >Stefan Moroney ... I agree that Axion is an application starved company but the opportunities remain immense. I was really glad to hear in the CC that Axion is ... finally ... going to pursue applications that will yield near term sales. I'm glad that the company spent a lot of time with the Fortune 500 clients they have been after for years because they have forced, guided & conjoled them it be much better than might otherwise have been possible. Although, it has been at considerable cost by not being involved with smaller more immediate markets. Problem is there are no sales to be had yet or anything like an actual commitment (maybe behind the curtain things are different) from the Majors and for what reason ... I don't know. I do know Axion needs some sort of cash flow.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • DRich, Your point about the majors forcing one toward excellence is a very good one. We have to look no further than AONE/Fisker to understand what haste can do to a company in large scale mfg. This would have been far less likely with a GM, Ford or BMW.


    Could there have been a better balance between big future stuff and near term opportunities. Well sure. I'm absolutely not a fan of having leaches come on board now but it is what it is. The peak will be lessened for sure.
    20 Aug 2013, 10:59 AM Reply Like
  • A Gretzky quote JP?
    - swoon-
    20 Aug 2013, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • SM
    Probably about a year ago I ran across an article that said in essence that the new cars are becoming more and more dependent on electricity for critical systems. The sudden death of a battery might make it impossible to steer or hit the brakes. For this reason automakers want a back up battery available for these critical systems.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:10 PM Reply Like
  • Does anybody have any idea of the economic return of an electric OTR engine? DRich or others do you have any info from when the green goat launched?


    I'm simply stumped by oddness that is NS. One one hand I can't imagine any business wasting valuable hanger/garage space to house a NS999 and there is no way that they are constantly doing work on it. Yet, if it was important they would be on whomever to get whatever the holdup was fixed.


    If NS is simply going to sit, AXPW needs to be calling every other rail in the US and Canada including ones who are looking at gen sets.
    19 Aug 2013, 05:51 PM Reply Like
  • >mrholty ... Somewhere I have estimates but right this minute I've no idea. Here's a guesstimate. A mainline train runs about 15 to 18 hours a day x 365 with an average of 3 locomotives. A locomotive burns about 210 GPH. If I'm remembering correctly, the battery OTR will replace about 1 1/3 locomotive, so my SWAG would be in the neighborhood of 40% per train.


    The Green Goat was advertised to reduce fuel consumption by 30%, but there is really no way to tell because every switcher has a completely different duty cycle. Some work a lot, some don't. The Green Goat was battery operated and used the diesel engine to recharge and add power when needed. Almost 180 degrees different to the way ePower uses its diesel & battery bank.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • DRich, I'd sell my soul for half of that.
    19 Aug 2013, 11:14 PM Reply Like
  • >iindelco ... Someday, hopefully,maybe by 2017-20, we'll find out what the fact might be. Then again ... maybe not. I'm probably guessing wildly on the high side. Right now I haven't a clue. I just hope I picked the right battery because the PbC is still, to me, the only one that makes sense. That's assuming battery power will be adopted but I'm wrong more often than right.
    19 Aug 2013, 11:34 PM Reply Like
  • "OTR will replace about 1 1/3 locomotive, so my SWAG would be in the neighborhood of 40% per train."


    Burning 210GPH over 18 hours is 90 barrels daily. 1/3 savings would amount to 30 barrels (3.99 metric tonnes) diesel fuel. NY Harbor spot price for ultra-low sulfur diesel futures (closing price) today was $3.2248 per gallon or $135.44 per barrel. Savings in neighborhood of $4K per train per day would amount to something more than pocket change.
    19 Aug 2013, 11:44 PM Reply Like
  • DRich, I'm on the same page as you are relative to what a well integrated energy storage unit can do in an OTR application. Nineteen % plus/minus one % is making me giddy.


    The pBc, filling in for Rick, should be far more respected in the media than it is. NS keeps telling us this but alas we keep reaching in toilets for pennies.


    Things can change very violently at some point relative for who chipped in. We may get some of what we see or we may talk about other things.
    19 Aug 2013, 11:48 PM Reply Like
  • >D-inv ... Norfolk Southern burns about 1.4 million gallons of diesel fuel every day or up to about 500 million gallons each year.



    I don't know how many trains NSC runs but let's guess a nice round number ... say 200 and 40% can make use of the OTR. That would be about 37M gallons per year or $119M savings. Not a lot of savings but maybe worth investigating. I hope it's more but I just hope they do investigate it.
    20 Aug 2013, 12:22 AM Reply Like
  • With a fleet of 4,000 locomotives, the total number of trains is a good deal higher.


    The fleet size and annual fuel usage also give you a pretty solid fuel consumption estimate of 125,000 gallons per locomotive per year.


    If the only benefit is direct fuel savings, a battery powered locomotive will save about $400,000 per year. If it adds a bit of efficiency to the other locomotives in a consist, the value goes up.
    20 Aug 2013, 06:53 AM Reply Like
  • Today marks three days in a row of higher lows (and a higher closing price) on volume of 6.3 million shares trading hands. It will be interesting to see if the up trend continues for the rest of the week.
    19 Aug 2013, 06:22 PM Reply Like
  • JP


    As volume ramps what Gross margin would you expect AXPW to show on the PbC product
    19 Aug 2013, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • Margins are a very hard thing to predict. Enersys generally earns margins in the 25% range for high quality batteries while Polypore, a component supplier, has margins in the mid to high 30s. It all depends on product mix and what the market will bear.
    19 Aug 2013, 06:53 PM Reply Like


    "Study explores long-term trends in motor vehicle emissions in US urban areas; targeting high-emitters"
    19 Aug 2013, 09:00 PM Reply Like
  • Yet another reason why ePower has a bright future. Even if it didn't reduce fuel costs, it would still reduce emissions.
    While that would slow explosive growth, the government requirements would force some level of adoption.
    20 Aug 2013, 08:26 AM Reply Like
  • That has been one of the drivers of the NS 999 yard switcher, and the OTR engine as well. There are 2 current buyers of Axion batteries. E-power may be shutting down instead of ramping up without it. Norfolk Southern has alternatives, but PbC reduces particulates and saves fuel.


    There has been a lot of discussion about the additional cost of a retrofit with e-power, but Rail will have to do a significant number of retrofits even if PBC is not included. If the regulators allow them to average the emissions of several engines at a sight, 1 NS 999 class upgrade may be able to qualify the overall yard as compliant. That alone may justify the upgrade.

    "Tier 4 standards—Longer-term standards for newly-built and remanufactured locomotives. Tier 4 standards are expected to require the use of exhaust gas aftertreatment technologies, such as particulate filters for PM control, and urea-SCR for NOx emission control."


    In 2015:
    HC emissions changes from .6 to .14
    NOx changes from 5.0 to 1.3
    PM changes from .1 to .05
    20 Aug 2013, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • JohnM,


    "Rail will have to do a significant number of retrofits even if PBC is not included"


    An excellent value-add to this blog would come from someone who finally explores this fully and presents their report here. IOW, what is the estimated number of battery locos that will be needed, and when?


    One of the biggest factors is what are their main choices? For example, 1) Gensets. DRich has talked a bit about that here, at least in regard to OTRs, 2) rebuilds of existing locos (remember that NS has an SD60e rebuild program, in which AltoonaWorks said that they only have to meet the Tier 0 standard, although they are voluntarily meeting Tier 2, so nowhere near Tier 4), 3) alternative-fuel locos, such as nat gas, and 4) battery locos, varying from 100% battery to a blend of battery loco with fuel burning ones in a consist, and 5) other? For example, can they pool credits or purchase them from someone else, or take other actions? Some have suggested that non-compliance may occur but the resulting problems can or will be minimized if the RRs are at least showing a strong effort to comply.
    20 Aug 2013, 10:46 AM Reply Like
  • 08/19/2013: EOD stuff partially copied from instablog (up already).
    # Trds: 159, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 100000, Vol 1507311, AvTrSz: 9480
    Min. Pr: 0.1360, Max Pr: 0.1525, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1439
    # Buys, Shares: 75 663211, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1438
    # Sells, Shares: 65 746100, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1437
    # Unkn, Shares: 19 98000, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.1466
    Buy:Sell 1:1.12 (44.0% “buys”), DlyShts 347971 (23.09%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 46.64%


    There was a 4K AH trade FINRA-reported daily short sales don't include. Adding that to the FINRA trade volume raises it from 1,503,311 to my total and would lower the short percentage from 23.15% to my 23.09%. If the shares are also added to the short sales, the short volume moves from 347,971 to 351,971 and the short percentage would be 23.35%.


    Yesterday: “The daily short sales appear to be ending the near-term high-volatility behavior and migrating towards a sideways vacillation around its averages, ... “. Today continues that behavior. I also said “This could give rise to a short sideways to slightly up trading pattern, maybe including a small price move back to the low $0.14xx area. ...”. Today's VWAP fits.


    Something I'll continue to watch is detailed by yesterday's comment: “This is a new and untested assessment based on some patterns I've noticed that frequently correlate to changes in price activity. Volume should continue the decline which just began from extreme levels. ...”. Today's volume did continue the decline, giving us two declines in a row – still too early to call it a trend.


    If the pattern is true, one option is that the next behavior could be a couple days with a more-or-less flat VWAP with the intra-day highs plateauing, or even dropping a bit, while the lows grind up a bit – i.e convergence typical of a short-term consolidation. In this case the daily short sales would vacillate around the “normal” range, or even the lower part of it. Volume decline continues.


    This seems the most likely scenario ATM.


    Another outcome could be a slow price weakening, but that appears to be the less frequent behavior when this pattern is observed – daily short sales vacillating “sideways” around the (low-to-)normal area. Volume decline continues.


    If daily short sales have started a progressive climb (possible with what's shown so far), but does not “spike”, look for VWAP to continue to slowly climb, accompanied by declining volume.


    Average trade size was elevated again due to a couple 100K trades, a 66K, four in the 50K range and three in the 40K range. Even with those removed, I think we'd be a bit larger than recent normal aws the number of 10K, 20K and 30K trades were a bit more than nomal.


    Week end & this week's daily estimated values (older dailys in prior EOD posts) for next share issue:
    06/14: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.2315, x 85%: $0.1968 Wk cls VWAP $0.2122
    06/21: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.2176, x 85%: $0.1850 Wk cls VWAP $0.1751
    06/28: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1956, x 85%: $0.1663 Wk cls VWAP $0.1474
    07/05: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1805, x 85%: $0.1534 Wk cls VWAP $0.1518
    07/12: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1657, x 85%: $0.1408 Wk cls VWAP $0.1403
    07/19: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1539, x 85%: $0.1309 Wk cls VWAP $0.1543
    07/26: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1555
    08/02: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1733
    08/05: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1410
    08/16: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1447, x 85%: $0.1230 Wk cls VWAP $0.1348
    08/19: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1441, x 85%: $0.1225


    Vol, in K, for above weeks: 4,356, 1,934, 3910, 1,217, 2902, 5041, 2731, 3889, 6920.3.
    Vol, in K, for above days: 1507.31.


    On my original inflection point calculations, readings for 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 200 day periods:
    1-day change: -3.3% 1.5% -3.4% 1.5% 0.4% -2.0%
    5-day change: -58.9% 19.5% 3.2% 10.8% 0.5% -1.8%
    5-day rate of change change: -57.6% 855.4% 144.9% 141.4% -8.4% -4.2%


    The changes on my original experimental inflection point calculations shows improvement from the prior two days:
    08/15/13 -27.4% -15.8% -2.3% -4.9% -2.7% -3.8% 1-day
    08/16/13 -29.9% -16.8% -9.5% -11.2% -6.6% -4.9% 1-day
    08/15/13 -75.0% -6.9% -5.8% -0.2% -22.8% -34.3%
    08/16/13 -512.0% -18.9% -24.7% -63.9% -55.5% -20.1% 5-day
    08/15/13 -16.6% 100.4% 970.8% 42.0% -1092.8% -118.8% change rate
    08/16/13 -26.9% -4427.2% -69.5% -107.5% -294.2% -318.1% change rate


    On my newer inflection point calculations, for those same periods:
    1-day change: 21.2% 22.5% 35.1% 29.0% 29.8% 39.5%
    5-day change: 341.0% 67.6% 242.6% 537.6% 111.9% 81.1%
    5-day rate of change change: -36.7% 24.6% -12.7% -17.8% -26.7% -24.8%


    On my newer version the same is happening:
    08/15/13 -53.6% -33.9% -41.8% -32.0% -29.6% -47.3%
    08/16/13 -13.9% -3.1% 11.2% 5.1% 10.0% 16.6% 1-day
    08/15/13 -51.6% -282.6% -58.4% -51.0% -46.4% -47.9%
    08/16/13 -91.6% -44.4% -57.5% -82.9% -50.5% -35.2% 5-day
    08/15/13 -17.2% -2.6% -5.2% -6.7% -11.1% -10.9%
    change rate
    08/16/13 -31.5% -39.2% -38.5% -42.4% -43.5% -37.3% change rate


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


    20 Aug 2013, 09:08 AM Reply Like
  • Just for the record, I read over these results every single day (and give HTL a thumbie). The amount of effort HTL is expending is immense.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • triple,


    I definitely second that regarding HTL!


    Thanks HTL, we do appreciate you and your thorough and dedicated work.


    20 Aug 2013, 09:42 AM Reply Like
  • Thank you gents!


    20 Aug 2013, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • Where have I heard this thesis before?


    'Perverse Effects'
    How green subsidies often increase carbon emissions.

    20 Aug 2013, 10:52 AM Reply Like
  • Magounsq, Thanks.


    No surprises. Just more ineffective government moving money around so they can skim it.
    20 Aug 2013, 12:16 PM Reply Like
  • :-) And clean air regs cause global warming.

    20 Aug 2013, 01:42 PM Reply Like
  • Tidewater Biz
    "This year, Norfolk Southern plans to roll out the NS 999 using hybrid batteries developed by Axion Power International,"


    It is being noticed.
    20 Aug 2013, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • Greentongue,
    My big hope with this, is that, if the NS999 works as well as we all hope it will, and NS decides to build more of them, they should have all problems with the parts from the other distrubutors figured out so that NS999-b won't take as long as NS999 to get out of the shop.
    20 Aug 2013, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • If the NS-999 works well, wouldn't the PO for more batteries be forthcoming? After all, they ordered the batteries for the NS-999 well in advance also. Perhaps we might even see it in 2013.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:01 PM Reply Like
  • Ranma,
    It would be nice to think so, but I don't see any chance of NS ordering more batteries for a second switcher before 2014. If NS is going to put in a PO this year with Axion, it would be for the OTR engine, but we don't have any clear idea when that might happen.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • Another article on the Network Rail app.


    Battery-powered trains in the works

    20 Aug 2013, 11:34 AM Reply Like
  • >iindelco, et al,


    "Working closely with Derby-based train manufacturer Bombardier and operator Greater Anglia, Network Rail will plans to adapt a Class 379 and fit it with two different forms of batteries: lithium (iron magnesium) phosphate and hot sodium nickel salt"


    I am curious as to why a two battery system?
    20 Aug 2013, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1, This will help.


    GE Demonstrates “Electric Bus of the Future”

    20 Aug 2013, 12:23 PM Reply Like
  • IINDelco, if "only" there was a cheaper power battery that could be used in that system to bring down the cost. I wonder where they could find something like that???
    20 Aug 2013, 12:58 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, No idea where they could find a competitively priced power battery.


    PBC- Power Battery Competitive?


    GE sodium w/ PbC? Hey, I can dream. But it's not so far fetched.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:09 PM Reply Like
  • The LiOn may work with PbC and not compromise GE's own Sodium battery sales. From the GE PR:
    "For example, lithium batteries, provide a lot of power for acceleration, but are not optimized to store energy for driving range. Sodium batteries are on the opposite side of the spectrum."


    I expected to see something about Dynamic Charge Acceptance here, but DCA does not seem to have entered the public realm yet.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:12 PM Reply Like
  • IINDelco,
    It's no different that the idea of linking the PbC to ZBB's flow battery for solar and windmills, that has been suggested here many times. The problem has always been that these companies are struggling so hard just to survive on their own, they haven't had the time to worry about the possibility of working together.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • They need to "Friend" each other ;)
    20 Aug 2013, 01:47 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, I understand your point concerning struggling to survive. But if something is not working yu have to make adjustments. Like Axion's comments regarding near term sales.


    Although I must admit TG should have never been surprised by BMW program timing. Maybe more in this time frame but expecting much before now was most likely not going to happen.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:50 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco,


    I still have a concern with a vehicle carrying around a few hundred pounds of molten sodium that must be maintained at 270*C.



    Sure, sodium is much lighter than lead, but that stuff in its metallic form is so bloody reactive, especially with water, that it has been the delight of freshman chemistry students and bane of their professors for aeons.

    20 Aug 2013, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin, Understand your point.


    I would think that in an application like heavy rail, where weight is not as much a factor, that you could manage the risks pretty well. Just like with lithium ion which can be nasty as well.


    Or you could just utilize lower risk energy storage like PbC. I like lower risk alternatives that cost less. Hey, but that's just me. I don't own a printing press spewing out money.
    20 Aug 2013, 03:17 PM Reply Like
  • NaMCl batteries use molten salt with traces of other metals to do their wizardry. The cells are incredibly sophisticated and expensive with about 20 parts each. The assembled battery packs are wonders of insulation that you can sit on comfortably even though the internal temperature is maintained at 270*C.


    The Zebra is a very good battery chemistry and while GE won't readily admit it, most of its Durathon technology was transferred from FZ Sonick in Stabio, Switzerland.
    20 Aug 2013, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • There is a good chance GE will make the same conclusions we have made - NaMCl is not acceptable for motive, critical backup, and residential backup. I think they could create a "HUB" using Axion's battery modules in no time. Emerson electric already signed an agreement with RedFlow to use their flow batteries.
    20 Aug 2013, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • Smoke em if ya got em.


    Recalled 1.2 million vehicles?


    Report: Mitsubishi Motors resuming production of Outlander PHEV after battery problems; 18,000 vehicle backlog


    " Mitsubishi Motors’ investigation found that batteries that had been improperly dropped as part of the screening process were included in supplies from Lithium Energy Japan.


    The automaker stopped assembling other models that use the same batteries, including its i-MiEV electric car, and recalled a total of roughly 1.2 million vehicles in June. It said that production of these models had already resumed by early this month."

    20 Aug 2013, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • Interesting presentation from Agrion:


    Couple good slides on GE and old ones on ZBB.

    20 Aug 2013, 12:01 PM Reply Like
  • Seeking Alpha article:


    SolarCity's Operating Leases Will Lead To Lots Of Future Cash



    "By 2010, the market opportunity of being able to produce energy at $0.15 per KwH was $58B. This number is derived based on the percentage of American households who pay over $0.15 per KwH for electricity, which happen to be SolarCity's target customers.


    This market is set to triple by 2017. In just 4-5 years, the market size of households paying over $0.15 per KwH for energy will represent $170B opportunity for SolarCity. This revolution of the viability of solar power has been the backbone of my investment thesis."


    I don't know if this article is necessarily germane to some of the discussions on the APC [I skip over a lot of posts]. But the author seems to believe solar energy will become a big part of electrical generation in the coming years [apparently replacing a lot of coal generated electricity].


    EDIT: This SA article rebuts the thesis of the above article:

    20 Aug 2013, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • BMW is beating MB in total sales in their class. Does this has anything to do with it ? Increase in total number of Jerks all around ??

    20 Aug 2013, 12:56 PM Reply Like
  • Probably.


    We eat Volvo drivers for breakfast.


    Luvin' my new X3!
    20 Aug 2013, 02:58 PM Reply Like
  • Doc, no offense intended.
    21 Aug 2013, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • None taken.


    Bloody Volvo Drivers can be tasty, if fresh and served rare. ;-)


    (There is a story behind that. A motorcycling friend from Australia had a helmet when we rode across Morocco that had "BLOODY VOLVO DRIVERS" stencilled across the back. She and her mate ride Harleys down under.)


    The motto of our tour leaders is, "If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room."
    21 Aug 2013, 08:32 PM Reply Like
  • Is it my imagination or is there more pumping of Axion on the micro cap trading/stock-picking sites?


    I have a Google alert for AXPW and am seeing an increase in the number of alerts lately. I don't expect this to make a whit of difference to us in the long run, but it may increase volatility in the near-term.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:11 PM Reply Like
  • MAXM makes an appearance on the bid @ $0.15x41K, as well as ARCA. Guess the financiers have decided to bump it up a bit?


    20 Aug 2013, 01:33 PM Reply Like
  • Getting in before the New Fiscal Year orders start being announced.
    20 Aug 2013, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • greent---you've mentioned fiscal year orders several times. If you could explain what you're thinking is there, that would help. Thx.
    20 Aug 2013, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor,
    I can't speak for greentongue, but from my experience many large companies end their FY not at the end of the calendar year but at the end of June. They then use the month of July to deal with all outstanding issues on their books, before moving forward with their new fiscal priorities. Therefore, it is not uncommon to see companies like this start new projects in August and September as their various departments are given their budgets/funding for the new fiscal year.
    Another factor in this is the change over from Summer to Fall in Europe. A lot of Europe goes on vacation during the Summer with a mass exodus from the cities of anyone who can afford to do so. Therefore, you also see a starting of new projects in the fall, as the executive workforce comes back from holiday and starts to focus on new projects.
    20 Aug 2013, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • My guess is Greentongue is talking about the Government, specifically the US gov't whose calendar years ends at the end of September.
    As they don't use GAAP accounting and your budget for the future year is based on the prior year areas that are under budget often go on a buying spree in the July-August timeframes sometimes going into September but many groups get nervous about getting stuff paid/posted in that time.


    I have a fishery friend who just went out and bought $35k worth of waders at the end of July. Airlines used to get large orders for airline tickets in September for travel the next spring and then most of the tickets were refunded in Feb (this isn't as common as before but it still happens).
    20 Aug 2013, 05:36 PM Reply Like
  • Mr I, many business depend on government purchases somewhere down their product streams. Many companies have a lot of people come back from summer vacation days around this time. Things pick back up as people return and projects on the back burner start moving again.
    20 Aug 2013, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • Looks like sort of a slow day here on the APC, so thought I'd sneak this in. I've been kind of fascinated by the price action of ZBB, Exide, and Axion, and how they often overlap each other's pps at varying intervals. I have them listed at the top of my Google Finance chart, and so can watch as they almost seem to jockey each other for position at times.


    Axion has been at the bottom rung for a while, but the trend is looking good vis-a-vis ZZB and Exide. I find myself rooting for ZBB [along with Axion of course], but Exide is a stock I would not want to own, even though I suspect it has a lot of potential to emerge from the BK cloud at some point. --- In fact, I find myself rooting for it in the opposite direction.
    20 Aug 2013, 02:14 PM Reply Like
  • Well, there must be a news leak somewhere? Up a second day and now +6.89%. MAXM in, bids well above $0.15 and asks stepping back from the pay window to get a better payoff.


    Maybe a new article we missed?


    20 Aug 2013, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • htl,




    Of PIPE.




    Uht oo ooo ooo oo.
    20 Aug 2013, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • I think this roller coaster has the potential to turn into a sustained uptrend. If so, it would mean significantly fewer PIPE shares being issued, which would then boost confidence, which could then send the pps even higher. A virtuous cycle in the offing perhaps? Regardless, it sure feels nice to bounce off the double bottom the way we did.


    Wouldn't it be ironic if the TK article that mentioned the disconcerting possibility of a .05 pps was the same article that may have brought many new eyes to Axion, and thus helping out with this latest uptrend? Not a far fetched notion in my mind. It also seems a good possibility a few shorts may be getting squeezed.
    20 Aug 2013, 02:47 PM Reply Like
  • WiO: Well, my experimental newer inflection points were much improved yesterday. Maybe I missed something by focusing on the "new" daily shorts pattern.


    20 Aug 2013, 03:03 PM Reply Like
  • Sustainability would be great, but until then, seeing some of the New Big Uglies on the bid is encouraging. MAXM is still at 15 with some size like htl mentioned, and ARCA of all guys has been active today, as well as NITE. The only clown not in town for this rally on the bid has been BTIG, but at least they haven't been on the ask, either.


    And like I say, we've got another couple weeks until the next PIPE repymt. Sure looking like they're running low on shares to dump, just like the last rollercoaster trip up. That one took us to 19.5 cents.
    20 Aug 2013, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • HTL & others


    Last week I sent a request to Craig Shields of 2greenenergy asking him to look at Axion. He did a nice little write up the same day:
    However, as of today there has been only three comments on the article; Mr. Shields, Tom Conrad, and me. Can't say how many views without comment of course.


    20 Aug 2013, 03:20 PM Reply Like
  • Great work Geopark> I didn't care for some of the take, but any publicity is better than none!


    Comments up to seven now and one says we took the pipe to avoid BK (the commenter with Altenrgystocks logo). Of course, w/o debt, difficult to go BK as JP reminds.


    20 Aug 2013, 03:31 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks HTL,


    I believe AltEnergyStocks is Tom Konrad's site.


    20 Aug 2013, 03:50 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. Conrad seems not to like the stock too much. Many people will believe that a PIPE deal trumps all other positive merits. JP did a decent job in describing way this time it may be different but the AXPW pps tells the current story whether we like it or not. Recent action may not imply a news leak but rather a return to our new normal around 15 cents give or take.

    20 Aug 2013, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • Wayne,


    I've seen Forbes articles on little known, illiquid small caps cause a big boost before, but generally within a day or two of publication. It's possible here that the new eyes have now had ample time to do some DD as well as digest the Q2 earnings and CC. So it's plausible that Konrad's articles brought in some of today's buyers.


    I also maintain my opinion that technical traders doing screens who know nothing of the business jump in when it looks like a major trend reversal is forming. (Self fulfilling prophecy then.)
    20 Aug 2013, 05:50 PM Reply Like
  • The only thing I've seen is mentioned above, penny stock web sites are beginning to mention Axion.
    20 Aug 2013, 02:33 PM Reply Like
  • Jveal: maybe thats it. We made a very fst flip from buy:sell around 1:2.xx to 1.27:1 now, 14:51. Looks like the turn began around 13:00.


    20 Aug 2013, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • I was doing a lot of driving this past weekend and it seemed like every time a saw a tractor-trailer I thought about ePower and Axion.


    There is one trucking company advertising for drivers that claimed it paid $50k for employee drivers and $175k for owner/operator drivers.


    Tim Enright and others, please help break down these numbers.


    I assume the owner operator is supplying his/her own tractor and is responsible for his/her own maintenance. I also assume insurance is involved (driving as well as one's own healthcare insurance cost). Does the extra $125k cover any other costs? How does fuel come in to play here?


    Also, do owner operators lease tractors? What are the economics of purchasing a new rig vs. leasing a new or used one?


    20 Aug 2013, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • apmarshall62, first, anyone who advertises the need for drivers/trucks is going to pay as little as possible and will inflate their numbers. There are waiting lists for companies that pay well and who take care of their drivers. Having said this...


    It is possible to gross $50k as a solo driver but you are going to need 5-6 years of experiance to make 42 CPM (50k/120k) in today's market.


    The O/O that you are reffering to is contracted/leased to the company that placed the ad. A smart O/O will pay himself first (175k-50k) when he considers contracts but there are many who don't which is what drivers our rates down. A typical O/O pays for EVERYTHING except for the permits and freight insurance.


    Some O/O do lease trucks and sometimes from the company they are contracted with. I have looked into several leasing contracts and would not sign any of them. However, I might lease a truck from a Ryder or someone in that business. You are better off just getting a truck and leasing yourself and the truck to a carrier (or getting your own authority).


    If I had a good contract that I expected to last several years then I would buy a new truck. Actually, I would buy a new truck glider style for much cheaper and better fuel economy. If I was unsure of the market then I would lease a newer truck from Ryder and let them deal with the maintenance. If I had a promising local low margin run I would but a very cheap used ($10-20k) truck...
    20 Aug 2013, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • Double Bottom Reversal


    I am not saying that this will hold up but so far it is looking interesting!


    A double bottom trend reversal pattern has formed, I am interested in seeing if it can work its way up through the next big resistance at $.195!


    Here is a link to a chart I put in my Dropbox.



    Here is a link to the Double Bottom Reversal description.

    20 Aug 2013, 04:28 PM Reply Like
  • RBRun: Did you remember to "share this ..."


    I got "Error (404)
    We can't find the page you're looking for. Check out our Help Center and forums for help, or head back to home. "


    P.S. I gave up in traditional TA when I realized how bad the PIPE would be for pps. Even consider my experimental stuff to be marginal as it was originated with a "normal" market in mind. When next shares are issued, I suspect the double bottom will not be the determinant of where price goes.
    20 Aug 2013, 04:43 PM Reply Like
  • I understand and agree regarding the PIPE financing effects. But I enjoy watching the chart patterns and do believe that if enough technical charting traders observe the same patterns it might assist in pulling a few more buyers into the game from the sidelines. It is kinda like a self fulfilling prophecy where if enough people see it and believe it then it must be true! ;-))
    20 Aug 2013, 05:05 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun: "self fulfilling prophecy " Amen to that.


    Did you figure out the Dropbox problem?


    20 Aug 2013, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun: Did you also notice the MACD is going positive? If it wasn't for the PIPErs that need to be paid I might get all giddy again!


    20 Aug 2013, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • If the above link does not work try this one:

    20 Aug 2013, 04:38 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun: that worked, but I see you "circumvented" the problem.


    When I first started using Dropbox I would forget to cklick the "Share this ..." item which gives a good link. If I just opened a link it apprently had the secure url and that wouldn't work. Since I was logged on I think that's why the share this link click was needed.


    20 Aug 2013, 05:11 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,


    Thanks for the Dropbox suggestion, that was the problem. I have noticed the MACD, in fact all the charting stuff I follow looks good but I definitely agree with you regarding the PIPERS! What we need about now is a press release with lots of revenues associated with it and a closing statement from TG informing us that more "significant orders" will be coming "soon"!
    20 Aug 2013, 11:28 PM Reply Like
  • Way OT but some gee wiz stuff for anyone interested.


    A couple inventions but in the last they developing lasers to control mosquitoes. Some "Star Wars" stuff we can all appreciate. No detail to share because it's better to hear it from the expert in the presentation.

    20 Aug 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • Preface; Story turns into a question.


    My uncle owns a portion of a small trucking company in North Texas that specializes in the relocation of heavy equipment, which is very lucrative right now give our infrastructure spending. Over the weekend I was at my brothers 3rd and final graduation where I brought the question of ePower and their viability to my uncle who runs and works in the trucking industry. When I threw out the number of $50k for a standard retrofit he dismissed the number as being too high by a minimum of 50% and up to 100% in his experience.


    I can ask him for some documentation to back up his assertion, but I was wondering where the backing is for the $50k reference that ePower uses to justify the expense and payback period as being sub 24 months compared to the normal incurred cost of a standard retrofit.


    If at some point I missed this thread from the concentrator I apologize.




    20 Aug 2013, 06:05 PM Reply Like
  • Phish, there was a time that when a truck reached a certain mileage the company would bring the truck in for a complete overhaul (engine, transmission & rear ends). Rebuilds on the road are double the cost so they would just pull the whole drive train and replace it with a new or rebuilt drive train. This reduced risk on the road as well as downtime for the truck/tractor. The pulled drive train was rebuilt and ready for the next truck. This is where glidder kits come from. You can have a lot of money tied up in a newly replaced drive train and a glidder puts a new truck around the drive train.


    I don't know anyone that replaces the whole drive train anymore. That doesn't mean it isn't done. It just means not in my circles. Most folks will do an "inframe" on the engine before they replace it completely. The rest of the drive train will get the same treatment unless a full replacement is needed. It really depends on the available capital of the company that owns the asset.


    Where ePower shines for me is when paired with a glidder kit. A glidder kit is a brand new 2014 truck without an engine or transmission. Add the ePower components and you are close to the standard price of a new truck only you have a serial hybrid truck instead. Hope this helps...
    20 Aug 2013, 07:00 PM Reply Like
  • PhishDBob, Thanks for sharing your findings with you uncle. Appreciate when people have contacts where they can run down information in industries that concern our area of interest and it's shared.


    Tim, As always thanks for sharing your knowledge on this topic.
    20 Aug 2013, 07:47 PM Reply Like
  • Yup want to double IIndelco's comment.
    Thanks for some real world info guys.
    20 Aug 2013, 10:09 PM Reply Like
  • Tim & PhishDBob: Thanks to both for raising the issue and adding some new information.


    The thought arises that the extracted drive train has some salvage value - it should be rebuildable and usable later in other trucks? I presume this value would be available to the owner of the rebuilt truck converting to serial-hybrid. Might that reduce the net cost? Or was it included in ePower's estimated costs already?


    21 Aug 2013, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • I am working through detailed cost comparisons of a conventional rebuild vs an ePower rebuild and trying to arrive at a clearer figure of what the numbers are likely to be when ePower get's away ordering individual components as needed and starts buying in larger volumes. The work is not finished yet, but my best guess is that an ePower conversion will cost the customer about $70,000 more than a conventional rebuild, which shouldn't be surprising when the batteries cost ePower $25,000 right off the top.


    We've already been through the drill of realizing that some of the numbers ePower threw around during its early days were little more than optimistic spit-ball estimates. When I've done my work I'll share my conclusions. Until I've done my work there's nothing to speculate about.


    ePower is my client and it has a lot of growing up to do very quickly if it wants to realize its potential. Growing up in public is difficult, but for now ePower is willing to let me talk. I cannot and will not assume responsibility for ePower's past estimates, but I'm doing my best to ensure that it's estimates are rock solid on a go forward basis.


    Please give me a chance to do my job right without second guessing or gratuitous criticism of a work in process.
    21 Aug 2013, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • >JP ... You've got quite some job ahead figuring out the rebuild costs. What I've seen is a really fragmented definition now that piecemeal "in-frame" is popular and seem to include, what I use to think of, "overhaul" right through to actual rebuilds and it all varies by the type of operator under consideration & type of shop doing the work from "roadside" to "in-house" to dealer.


    I'm more than willing to wait to see what you come up with. I don't think I'd make the attempt. I do agree with Tim Enright that Gliders make a whole lot of sense.
    21 Aug 2013, 10:36 AM Reply Like
  • JP
    Thanks and


    Thanks to ePower for letting you talk!
    21 Aug 2013, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • JP,
    21 Aug 2013, 01:56 PM Reply Like
  • JP, well if anyone can fit the puzzle together it is you...


    The are almost as many business plans as there are trucks and putting numbers to it will be kin to herding cats. Good luck and I am looking forward to reading your research.
    22 Aug 2013, 12:17 AM Reply Like
  • That is some enlightening information. I had been thinking that the total ePower rebuild cost was around $70k. If it is $70k MORE than a conventional rebuild would cost, then that changes my thinking on the value proposition just a bit. Am I reading that right? I will hold off on any further speculation until your more thorough numbers are available.
    22 Aug 2013, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • The toughest part of any discussion relating to "cost" is figuring out who's cost you're talking about. A manufacturer buys parts, pays for labor and amortizes its facilities to arrive at its cost. It then adds a mark-up to cover trivialities like R&D, SG&A and hopefully a profit for its stockholders. When you're done turning the crank, the cost to the end user is very different from the cost to the manufacturer and it's the end-user's costs that matter.


    To understand the economics of ePower's drivetrain we must have a solid handle on what the end-user cost of an ePower retrofit is and what the end-user cost of a conventional retrofit is. Developing reliable data on the ePower side will be easy because it's just cost accounting. Developing reliable data for the competitive alternatives is a much greater challenge, particularly if you want to analyze the economic differential of a system over a useful chassis life that may include three complete overhauls.
    22 Aug 2013, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • >Tim Enright,


    "Where ePower shines for me is when paired with a glidder kit. A glidder kit is a brand new 2014 truck without an engine or transmission. Add the ePower components and you are close to the standard price of a new truck only you have a serial hybrid truck instead. Hope this helps..."


    Since the $XXXXX.00 for an ePower retrofit/build presumes an engine to attach to, I wonder your guesstimate (range) for a complete Cummins 6 as discussed previously in USD. This would need to be added to the glider cost, though the transmission is unneeded(?).


    Typical cost range for a complete engine overhaul on an 8B?


    Also a typical range for the sleeper cab glider 'kit' cost?


    I am not trying to speculate as to the costs in one-off or bulk buying for ePower retrofits, rather I am trying to build a notion of the costs for the other side of the eventual equation.


    I know there are many different iterations of these trucks and many possibilities as to extent and type of overhaul (in frame vs. on a bench...) so any 'color'/clarity you might add would be appreciated.


    22 Aug 2013, 01:35 PM Reply Like
  • >PhishDBob,


    Am I guessing correctly that your uncle was suggesting a $12,500 to $25,000 cost for a "standard retrofit"?


    What did he/you mean a "std. retrofit" might/would include?


    22 Aug 2013, 01:43 PM Reply Like
  • Another consideration is exactly what ePower SELLS.
    Is it the entire refit or only the instructions on how to do it plus a few critical components?
    Is labor included or excluded?
    Will there be a point where (some of) the components can be bought from the sources?
    Will there be a range of components available that are interchangeable but of varying quality / price? (new/used)
    22 Aug 2013, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • >greentongue, I believe these are the kind of considerations John Petersen is hoping to get a handle on so future comparisons are closer to a 'Washington vs. Granny Smith' apple equation.


    I am trying to get a handle on the truck side of the calculation, not ePowers.
    22 Aug 2013, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus> The ePower retrofit removes the entire drivetrain and replaces it with a smaller diesel engine that's mated to a generator, drive motor, transmission and battery pack that optimizes the fuel consumption for the specific operating conditions the tractor will face.


    If you want to comparison shop think in terms of a glider with an original ePower install and a glider with a conventional install.


    For now ePower is doing all the retrofit work in its own shop. Once it has a proven solution, it wants to transition to selling the components in kit form to fleet operators who want to send their own mechanics to an ePower installation school.
    22 Aug 2013, 02:13 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1, A complete glider kit from Fitzgerald is around $117k. The list cost of a new truck with the same basic package is around $150k. You could get a new truck for around $130-135 depending on the market and your ability to dicker.


    The Fitzgerald kit (complete):


    The parts in question are the engine and transmission. Pacific Power Products just quoted me $32k for a 3/4 replacement and $37k for a full replacement. These are numbers for the complete replacement for a factory re-manufactured engine and transmission. The 3/4 assumes some top end parts are good.


    To get at the back of the napkin cost of a glider kit we take $37k from $117k for an adjusted figure of $80k. We add back in the $70k for the ePower kit and we are back to a list cost of $150k.


    The deal here is the ePower is in a brand new truck. This means it can be financed at a good rate which opens the market big time. You can sell this truck to all levels in the business. You would never get a bank to finance $70k for an independent owner on a used truck. With the EPA regulations upon us the new truck market should be very good.


    The other thing here is you would not have to make a one size fits all kind of a kit (could not be done anyway). You target the Freightliner glider first and build a detailed/custom kit. When this is complete you move on to the next kit (Kenwoth, Peterbuilt...)


    Color/clarity would be time consuming as there are many varieties which vary with the capital of the business and the economy. Basically, your plan is to own the tractor forever or you roll the dice and own the truck for X number of miles and sell hoping to pocket your maintenance fund.


    Here is some color:


    US Express buys new trucks and then sells them at 250k miles. They offer to lease them to the drivers that work for them which, in turn, lease the truck and themselves back to US Express (these are the leases I would not sign). The problem with this is US Express controls the freight and therefor the profit of the driver (company store). US Express is not the only big fleet that does this (they all do).


    The companies that keep tractors forever are the large terminal-to-terminal carriers such as FedEx, UPS, Yellow, RHL and others. These are mostly day cabs which I think JP calls class 8B. These are candidates for the ePower conversion and financing would be less of a problem. The question is can you get 56 batteries in the wheelbase of a daycab? JP says that Jay says yes. In my opinion, this is the ePower used retrofit market. I am wondering if you can get a daycab glider for a new tractor in this market...
    22 Aug 2013, 07:17 PM Reply Like
  • >Tim Enright,


    Thank You for the trove of info! Great to have Real World insight/feedback!
    22 Aug 2013, 10:39 PM Reply Like
  • In the comments section on Craig Shields' Axion article (on his 2greenenergy website ---, Tom Konrad wrote the following:


    "If they [Axion] can bring cash in the door soon, they have the option to pay in cash instead of shares, in which case the stock should appreciate rapidly."


    I don't believe this is correct, is it? I've believed Axion had the option to make interest payments in cash, but not the principal. --- If they do have the option of paying in cash, I would hope it's a TOP priority to do so, and of the highest consideration in their search for a new CFO. In my mind, there's no greater priority for Axion than figuring out how to get out of this financing pickle they're in.


    If the PIPE transaction ends up diluting the number of shares by as much as 50-100%, that translates [to me] in lost shareholder value running into the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. [I base that on the possibility of Axion someday reaching a $500M to $1B market capitalization]. --- Given the very high stakes, I would hope they don't skimp on finding a CFO that is extraordinarily skillful in navigating the precarious financial seas they are currently in.
    20 Aug 2013, 06:25 PM Reply Like
  • The PIPE is moderately toxic to the stockholders. Based on what we've already seen it will take a minimum of 47 million and a maximum of 67 million shares to clear the PIPEers. From a starting point of 113 million shares, that works out to a 1/3 reduction of your ownership percentage.


    The PIPE is not the least bit toxic to the corporation which now has adequate financial resources to carry it into Q3 of 2014. There is absolutely nothing precarious about the waters Axion is currently navigating.
    20 Aug 2013, 07:17 PM Reply Like
  • Wayne,


    Axion is in no danger of being in rough seas for another year plus if ever. However, the rough seas are for anyone who has an average prices above 30 cents -imo. But yes you are right that Axion will have a hard time ever becoming a 100m or 1B market cap company with so many shares out there that would need to be churned. That's a high class problem though if we get there. Also I'd suggest the odds that Axion pays off the PIPE in cash are worse than a snow ball in a very hot place.
    20 Aug 2013, 08:34 PM Reply Like
  • Axion had 131,330,930 shares outstanding on August 7th.


    Tesla had 121,449,647 shares outstanding on July 31st.


    Tesla's stockholders are irrationally optimistic bordering on the psychotic.


    Axion's stockholders are irrationally pessimistic bordering on the psychotic.


    "So many shares" truly is in the eye of the beholder.
    20 Aug 2013, 09:21 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    "Axion had 131,330,930 shares outstanding on August 7th.
    Tesla had 121,449,647 shares outstanding on July 31st"


    True, but Tesla's board isn't asking their stockholder's to give them the ability to put another 150 million shares up for sale above the current maximum limit of 200 million.
    Also, Tesla's stock holders haven't had to watch for the last two years as one large shareholder after another, and now one PIPEer after another dumps as many shares as they can of Axion stock into the market for whatever price they can get for them. As I've said before, Axion's share "holders" aren't the problem. Axion's share "sellers" are.
    20 Aug 2013, 10:17 PM Reply Like
  • Tesla had 2 BILLION shares authorized at June 30th.


    Axion's board wants the corporate authority to issue up to 350 million.


    Every well structured company has a wide margin between its authorized stock and its issued stock. It's an anachronism of corporate law, but without a margin the board can't do anything without going back to stockholders for approval.


    Axion has had the worst run of luck I've ever seen with respect to the market behavior of its big investors, but all of that market behavior was attributable to causes beyond Axion's control. Stockholders go bankrupt, die, get wildly overextended and change managers. It's inconvenient for public stockholders and it makes the next round of financing harder for the company because new investors won't listen to "true value" arguments if the number in the story exceeds the quoted bid.


    The stock is still broken, but that's no reason to cripple the corporation.
    21 Aug 2013, 05:19 AM Reply Like
  • "but all of that market behavior was attributable to causes beyond Axion's control."


    Lack of sales is why shareholders have dumped stock. Even estates would hold some stock if the company had revenues and profits.


    In my experience when funds or individuals rebalance their portfolio they keep what they think is winners that will appreciate and sell stocks they perceive as losers for better opportunities.
    21 Aug 2013, 05:50 AM Reply Like
  • LT,
    Investors in microcaps know they are playing a different game than the big boards, if they don't then they are poorly informed and haven't done proper due diligence. A company in the R&D stage isn't expected to have real sales and a company in transition to commercialization takes money, time, patience and hard work. Trying to compare stocks from the small caps to the big boards is a waste of time. JMHO
    21 Aug 2013, 06:27 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed, that is all true, but they still use the same or similiar criteria when re=evaluating and rebalancing. When they do not see potential they sell. They can buy back anytime if things change.


    So far they have all been correct...just look at AXPW charts. Axionista's have suffered the brunt of this.
    21 Aug 2013, 06:37 AM Reply Like
  • Each of the big investors who bought in 2008 and 2009 knew they had no reasonable short- to medium-term liquidity prospects when they made their investments.


    When Quercus bought 9 million shares in 2008 it knew that cumulative trading since from inception through December 2007 was 2.5 million shares. The only way Quercus expected a profitable exit was if Axion was able to complete development of the PbC and introduce a product to market. It suffered no delusions that the process would be fast or certain.


    When four different investors bought between 7.2 and 8.8 million shares each in late 2009, they knew that total sell-side trading volume in 2009 was roughly 3.6 million shares. The only way any of the 2009 investors ever expected a profitable exit was if Axion was able to complete development of the PbC and introduce a product to market. They suffered no delusions that the process would be fast or certain.


    Taking about what a hypothetical investor might have done with the stock of a hypothetical company in a different business is not even interesting.


    The people who suffered are the cash investors who bought stock from Axion at prices ranging from $2.10 to $.57 per share and sold those shares at major losses to Axionistas who were able to buy at bargain prices.


    Axionistas have suffered from a stock price that's wallowed at a dismal level for a very long time. Unless they've sold and walked away, the Axionistas haven't lost anything.
    21 Aug 2013, 07:40 AM Reply Like
  • "buy at bargain prices" is still a good thing for those that can do it.
    This product at this price has gotten to the point of being a "no brainer".
    As more and more "IT WORKS!!" become known, things will get very interesting.
    21 Aug 2013, 08:11 AM Reply Like
  • "Taking about what a hypothetical investor might have done with the stock of a hypothetical company in a different business is not even interesting."


    BlackRock, Quercus and other investors were not hypothetical investors and the shares of AXPW they held and sold were real. They all have accountants & analyst on staff and could have held the stock but seen better opportunities.


    So far, whoever made the decision to sell looks like a hero.


    Axionistas loss is in opportunity cost, dilution of their % of ownership, and buying power for other investments. Even the ones who bought at .25-.35 are down 50% +/- .


    I think even you said that "If I had known it would take this long, I might have done something different".
    21 Aug 2013, 08:24 AM Reply Like
  • Quercus invested way too much money in start-ups in 2007 and 2008 before the crash. After the crash it's plan to be the lead financier on fifty alternative energy deals fell apart and instead of being able to bring in partners it had to carry the weight alone. To do so it sold its strongest investments, including Axion, because they were the ones that could generate cash to keep the rest of the portfolio afloat.


    Blackrock manages about $4 trillion and doesn't ordinarily fool around with micro-caps. It certainly did not devote substantial analyst or management time to a decision to sell a stock that represented one millionth of its portfolio. Blackrock was the last of the 2009 investors to sell and while we have no earthly idea what its decision was based on, the beating the stock price took from sales by other big holders probably had an impact.


    The rest is guesswork on your part and Mr. Berkowitz' participation in a couple of conference calls after Blackrock exited suggest that your interpretation of Blackrock's actions is way off base.


    I have frequently said that I might have done something different if I'd known that developing a new battery technology would take a decade, but that's because my typical timeframe with a client is two to three years. By the time they made their investments, Quercus and the other big uglies had a very clear picture of the work that had been completed and the work that remained.


    I've also frequently said that despite the current psychotic market price I've never felt better about my risk reward profile even though my average cost is north of $1 per share.
    21 Aug 2013, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • I don't think there is any danger of Axion paying anything back in cash within the next year. Even if sales start to ramp late this year, they are still going to need to do another round of capitalization in 2014. There is no way the can sell enough power cubes to avoid it, and everything else is too far out. In fact, they should be already starting to beat the bushes for inverstors or "strategic partners aligned with their interests."


    So even if the PIPErs only dilute us by 1/3 this year, we can look forward to another round of dilution next year. Hopefully, not as bad--it will all depend on whether the revenue ramp is any clearer.
    21 Aug 2013, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • "I don't think there is any danger of Axion paying anything back in cash within the next year. Even if sales start to ramp late this year, they are still going to need to do another round of capitalization in 2014. There is no way the can sell enough power cubes to avoid it, and everything else is too far out."


    ngs ... I think you should take another look at Axion prospects. ALL PbC sales Axion makes at this point add to its top line, its bottom line, and length of runway before reaching financing cliff. Any further need for capitalization is tied to operating expenses such current plant and equipment is substantially underutilized.


    My estimates suggest that sale of 6,000 PbCs at price levels revealed to date would extend the finance runway into 2014. Sale of 3MW of PowerCube capacity alone would extend the finance runway into 2015. OTOH, TG noted in the cc that "batch" sales of PbCs have occurred since end of Q2 but buyers could not be disclosed. ePower plans purchase $250k (560 PbCs) or more of PbCs (& battery management systems) within the next 6-to-12 months. While prospects for a Norfolk Southern PbC purchase for an OTR locomotive appear limited and diminishing by the day, such a purchase could involve more than 1,000 PbCs.
    21 Aug 2013, 12:43 PM Reply Like
  • u nailed it, D-inv. With cash burn so darn low, PC, NS and ePower sales should push back the next round into 2015, and at higher prices. I think we've seen the last bad round. Maybe even the last one, period, that's not for expansion.
    21 Aug 2013, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • D-Inv: " ePower plans purchase $250k"


    You might want to model somthing closer to what TG had in the CC? " ... in excess of $200K", IIRC. ISTR he said that was the battery cost. Since we don't know where the converters/inverters and associated are coming from, we don't know if that adds to AXPW revenue or not.


    We also don't know if there's charge for the control software, if it's bundled with something AXPW supplies, etc.


    Just a thought ...
    21 Aug 2013, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • :-) Thanks, HTL. What I am really modeling is PbC counts, but one does need to keep in mind that the $25k sale per dPower truck includes battery management system as well as 56 PbCs.
    21 Aug 2013, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. I and D-Inv. If I had your optimism, I would be buying heavily right now. Based on my own observations, I am convinced that NS and ePower sales will be 2015 events at best. Same or worse for BMW. The best thing that could happen in 2014 would be that the path to achieving these sales becomes clear enough to support a higher stock price when the do have to raise revenue. They absolutely will need to raise revenue in 2014. The only question is if it will be in the 3rd or 4th quarter. I sincerely hope to be proven wrong.
    22 Aug 2013, 09:53 AM Reply Like
  • ngs ... I misspoke earlier in saying, "My estimates suggest that sale of 6,000 PbCs at price levels revealed to date would extend the finance runway into 2014." The present finance runway extends into '14Q3. 6,000 PbCs sold would extend coverage of operating expenses into 2015.


    I am convinced that if NSC fails to act before year end and order more PbCs for an OTR (and possibly for non-locomotive applications), that potential market is dead. At least I will no longer consider NSC a potential future buyer. Where ePower is concerned, one must accord their announced plans zero credibility to hold the opinion that "ePower sales will be 2015 events at best" OR assume it will take ePower personnel a full 18 months or more to mate a six cylinder road-certified diesel to a generator for their system instead of using the John Deere genset with 4 cylinder engine. Unless ePower itself is constrained by capital limitations, I regard the probability of ePower purchasing PbC batteries for at least two more trucks this year as near 100%.


    Sales to ePower alone, however, are unlikely to generate enough revenue to extend AXPW's operating capital runway more than a few weeks. PowerCube sales, NSC OTR locomotive sales, possible sales of more tax write-offs, and sales to yet-to-be-identified buyers present strong opportunities to extend operating capital runway into 2015 and beyond.
    22 Aug 2013, 12:30 PM Reply Like
  • Unfortunately, we don't know what sales Axion included in their comment about not needing more outside capital until into Q3 2014. IOW, what exactly does this mean?:


    "We believe that the currently available funds at June 30, 2013 and including net proceeds from May 8, 2013 issue of $9 million in senior convertible notes and $1 million in subordinated convertible notes and internally generated funds from net sales will provide sufficient financial resources to fund our current operations, working capital and capital expenditures beyond the second quarter of 2014."


    Does that include any PC sales, and if so, how much? Any sales at all to NS? The $200k (10 x at least $20k each) order from ePower that was announced in Q3 2013, after Q2 ended?


    Based on Granville's seperate comment about sales to [BMW] not being in their forecast, I'd say it's reasonable to say anything there will be sugar.


    Funny "coincidence" that cash burn of roughly $1.5mil/quarter is = the PIPE funding amt/quarter ($500k/month x 3 months). So if that source alone can fund Axion thru Q1 2014 (minus a month or two since Q2 2013 end, where Axion did not get the $500k, I think), then the $2.8mil of cash they had at end of Q2 2013 takes them into Q3 2014, without any more sales than what they have been experiencing.


    IOW, looks like sales to PC, NS and ePower would add to their runway (assuming they are at a positive gross margin, which is reasonable given Granville's discipline). I think it's reasonable to expect some PC sales and resulting cash well before Q3 2014, given what Granville just said, and at least $200k in sales to ePower. I also think it's reasonable to expect at least one or two sales, with delivery and hence some positive net cash flow, to NS over the next year. They may be slow as heck but no, the NS projects are NOT dead.
    22 Aug 2013, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • Axion's current assets were $12.8 million at June 30th. It's non-PIPE current liabilities were about $1.2 million, leaving net working capital in the $11.5 million range.


    With an assumed burn rate of $2 million per quarter which can only decline if sales increase or tax credit sales become a recurring item, there's a solid five quarters of running room before the tank hits empty.
    22 Aug 2013, 01:19 PM Reply Like
  • Spot on, Mr. I.
    22 Aug 2013, 01:20 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv. My presumption is that the projected finances being good until Q3 2014 takes into account what sales they might reasonably expect. I also assume it means until the beginning of Q3, not the end of it. 6,000 additional batteries above projected sales, assuming a 25% margin, will not get them much farther down the road. Another $200k sale to ePower is also not going to keep them solvent into 2015 without a cash infusion. Even another $400k sale to NS is not going to take them into 2015. Sales will need to be in the tens of millions before they can detach themselves from the teat of annual capital rasing. As I said, I will be very happy to be proven wrong.
    22 Aug 2013, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • Low tens of millions unless you want to assume PbC margins won't be any better than flooded contract margins of 15%.
    22 Aug 2013, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • Agreed. I'll settle for $20M for starters.
    22 Aug 2013, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • ngs ... I grant you that TG is the only person who knows what revenues he counted in shay finances were good until into '14Q3. That said, he did not put any qualifiers around the statement and I am interpreting his statement as counting as revenues only signed sales contracts in hand with specified delivery dates. Given experience with the NSC purchase of PbCs for the NS999, he would be foolish to do otherwise IMO. I expect your profit margin allowance is low and use 30% - 35% in my own calculations.


    I do not see "another $400K sale to NS" likely prior to '14H2 as that implies an order for a second switcher/yard locomotive. We have yet to see the 1st switcher/yard locomotive "in the wild". A 1,200 -1,600 PbC order (vice 864 for the NS999) for an OTR is more likely.


    "If I had your optimism, I would be buying heavily right now. "


    Added 15K @.13 today.
    22 Aug 2013, 03:15 PM Reply Like
  • Day 4 of Higher Lows (and higher closes). Volume was actually higher today than yesterday and well above the 50 day average volume, including good volume into the close. Let's see if the trend continues tomorrow and into the weekend!
    20 Aug 2013, 06:49 PM Reply Like
  • 08/20/2013: EOD stuff partially copied from instablog (up shortly).
    # Trds: 242, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 60000, Vol 1775552, AvTrSz: 7337
    Min. Pr: 0.1411, Max Pr: 0.1648, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1545
    # Buys, Shares: 109 747896, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1555
    # Sells, Shares: 130 1017656, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1539
    # Unkn, Shares: 3 10000, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.1539
    Buy:Sell 1:1.36 (42.1% “buys”), DlyShts 280101 (15.78%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 27.52%


    Yesterday I focused on some possible outcomes related to a daily short sales pattern I had identified. In the process I may have failed to give sufficient weight to what my newer inflection point calculations had been suggesting, although today's EOD readings suggest that a change in trend may NOT yet have occurred.


    For the daily short sales pattern, I had noted the decrease in volatility continued and expected that trend to continue. It did so and the short percentages for the last few days show this as the range narrows: 25.19%, 15.71%, 23.09% and 15.78% (today). Today may break the trend as an unexpected burst of bullish behavior appeared at 13:49 when a major turn in bid/ask behavior occurred. I'm now expecting a daily short sales spike and if it occurs it suggests a change in trend. Doesn't suggest up or down, just a change. This seems even more likely since the inflection point calculations had been improving over several days, which I have been noting. I may not have given them the weight they deserved because I was focused on the new pattern of daily short sales I had spotted and I don't trust much of any TA since the financing deal was cut.


    But today's readings of the inflection point calculations again suggest it may not have been important because they do not support continuation of the rise we saw today.


    Briefly, relating to the short sales, yesterday I saw three possibilities. I thought the one most likely was “... the next behavior could be a couple days with a more-or-less flat VWAP with the intra-day highs plateauing, or even dropping a bit, while the lows grind up a bit – i.e. convergence typical of a short-term consolidation. In this case the daily short sales would vacillate around the “normal” range, or even the lower part of it. Volume decline continues”.


    Prior to 13:49, this was looking like the correct call. VWAP was up only 46/100ths of a penny to $0.1485 (typical late-day weakness hadn't come in yet), price spread was $0.1411-$0.1525 (higher low and high flat with Monday's), and volume was ~499K (estimated on track to end no higher than 1.1MM-1.2MM shares traded, down from ~1.5MM).


    I commented in the APC that there may have been some kind of news leak? Jveal said he'd seen more mention of Axion on penny-stock sites,, and Geopark said that he emailed 2greenenrgy, The 2greenenergy site had done a very short piece mentioning Axion. These may explain what happened. I was at a loss to do so.


    Here's parts of what we looked like before 13:49, 13:49 and prior to late-day weakness, and late-day weakness (came later than normally: 15:17) to EOD.
    Min. Pr: 0.1411, Max Pr: 0.1525, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1485, Buy:Sell 1:1.30 (43.1% “buys”)
    Min. Pr: 0.1505, Max Pr: 0.1648, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1562, Buy:Sell 1.32:1 (56.5% “buys”)
    Min. Pr: 0.1552, Max Pr: 0.1630, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1581, Buy:Sell 1:5.21 (16.1% “buys”)


    Note the “late-day weakness” today refers to the rush to take profits (83.9% “sells”), not the VWAP. There was price compression though. Even before I knew what the EOD numbers looked like I was thinking this push up couldn't go far because of the heavy profit-taking seen as the late-day weakness bloomed to it's full glory.


    Another thing that makes me think the push up will stall is that the volume, although higher, was not strongly higher. I expect today will show lower volume again.


    One more from yesterday, regarding the daily shorts activity: “If daily short sales have started a progressive climb (possible with what's shown so far), but does not “spike”, look for VWAP to continue to slowly climb, accompanied by declining volume”. The short sales did not climb, but rather declined on both a volume and percentage basis in spite of increased trading volume. So this also suggests, if the newly-identified pattern correlation is valid that the rise will not be strong, although I can't suggest the trend is broken based on one day's reversal – this vacillation is completely normal.


    Week end & this week's daily estimated values (older dailys in prior EOD posts) for next share issue:
    06/14: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.2315, x 85%: $0.1968 Wk cls VWAP $0.2122
    06/21: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.2176, x 85%: $0.1850 Wk cls VWAP $0.1751
    06/28: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1956, x 85%: $0.1663 Wk cls VWAP $0.1474
    07/05: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1805, x 85%: $0.1534 Wk cls VWAP $0.1518
    07/12: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1657, x 85%: $0.1408 Wk cls VWAP $0.1403
    07/19: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1539, x 85%: $0.1309 Wk cls VWAP $0.1543
    07/26: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1555
    08/02: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1733
    08/05: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1524, x 85%: $0.1295 Wk cls VWAP $0.1410
    08/16: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1447, x 85%: $0.1230 Wk cls VWAP $0.1348
    08/19: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1441, x 85%: $0.1225
    08/20: 20 lowest intra-day VWAPs in 40 days avg, $0.1441, x 85%: $0.1225


    Vol, in K, for above weeks: 4,356, 1,934, 3910, 1,217, 2902, 5041, 2731, 3889, 6920.3.
    Vol, in K, for above days: 1507.31, 1775.55.


    On my original inflection point calculations, readings for 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 200 day periods:
    1-day change: -5.4% 12.2% -7.9% 3.8% -2.5% -2.5%
    5-day change: -132.7% 36.3% -42.0% 29.3% -2.9% -10.7%
    5-day rate of change change: -343.5% -13.4% -353.1% 45.0% -44.5% -335.2%


    The changes on my original experimental inflection point calculations show a decline in the rate of improvement we have been seeing over the prior three days for the one-day change.
    08/15/13 -27.4% -15.8% -2.3% -4.9% -2.7% -3.8% 1-day
    08/16/13 -29.9% -16.8% -9.5% -11.2% -6.6% -4.9% 1-day
    08/19/13 -3.3% 1.5% -3.4% 1.5% 0.4% -2.0% 1-day
    08/15/13 -75.0% -6.9% -5.8% -0.2% -22.8% -34.3% 5-day
    08/16/13 -512.0% -18.9% -24.7% -63.9% -55.5% -20.1% 5-day
    08/19/13 -58.9% 19.5% 3.2% 10.8% 0.5% -1.8% 5-day
    08/15/13 -16.6% 100.4% 970.8% 42.0% -1092.8% -118.8% change rate
    08/16/13 -26.9% -4427.2% -69.5% -107.5% -294.2% -318.1% change rate
    08/19/13 -57.6% 855.4% 144.9% 141.4% -8.4% -4.2% change rate


    On my newer inflection point calculations, for those same periods:
    1-day change: 27.1% 39.2% 42.3% 40.0% 34.6% 57.7%
    5-day change: -225.5% 176.7% -17.9% 27.9% -2.3% -8.4%
    5-day rate of change change: -172.0% -51.4% -114.9% -91.8% -125.5% -113.5%


    On my newer version the same reduction in improvement is happening.
    08/15/13 -53.6% -33.9% -41.8% -32.0% -29.6% -47.3% 1-day
    08/16/13 -13.9% -3.1% 11.2% 5.1% 10.0% 16.6% 1-day
    08/19/13 21.2% 22.5% 35.1% 29.0% 29.8% 39.5% 1-day
    08/15/13 -51.6% -282.6% -58.4% -51.0% -46.4% -47.9% 5-day
    08/16/13 -91.6% -44.4% -57.5% -82.9% -50.5% -35.2% 5-day
    08/19/13 341.0% 67.6% 242.6% 537.6% 111.9% 81.1% 5-day
    08/15/13 -17.2% -2.6% -5.2% -6.7% -11.1% -10.9% change rate
    08/16/13 -31.5% -39.2% -38.5% -42.4% -43.5% -37.3% change rate
    08/19/13 81.1% -36.7% 24.6% -12.7% -17.8% -26.7% -24.8% change rate


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


    21 Aug 2013, 08:59 AM Reply Like
    21 Aug 2013, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • Sorry, I found the above article about TESLA on yahoo and thought the conclusions sounded a little familiar. forgive me if it has already been posted....Chas
    21 Aug 2013, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • >Charlieburg ... No problem ... it's really funny. A good way to start my day.
    21 Aug 2013, 10:15 AM Reply Like
  • Charlieburg, Thanks for the post. I saw it already and thought to myself, "No way". I think he'd be nuts to throw away the aura (facade?) he's created around the vehicles he's built and the dream of a more main stream lower cost unit for the future. JMO
    21 Aug 2013, 10:24 AM Reply Like
  • My quote of the day comes from Panasonic's Q2 earnings call:


    "We have contracted with Tesla Motors to supply our cylinder type battery for more than 80,000 cars in next four years. We are confident that they highly evaluate our products with high capacity, light weight and high durability."



    I wonder where Elon's going to find cheap batteries for all those additional cars Tesla plans to build. Anybody want to bet on Panasonic's willingness to sell batteries at a loss so that Tesla can make a 25% gross margin?
    21 Aug 2013, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • You mean Panasonic the company that's losing its ass on TV's? I don't think they'd be willing to sell at a loss on another major product line!
    21 Aug 2013, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • Over the last two years Panasonic has lost $15 billion on its lithium-ion battery segment. They've written plants down to zero and idled a ton of capacity. The idea that Panasonic will continue it's money losing ways for the privilege of helping Tesla is just one of many popular urban legends.
    21 Aug 2013, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • "They've written plants down to zero and idled a ton of capacity. "


    Uuuum, does it cost them more to run the zero value P&E than they get for the product?
    21 Aug 2013, 12:49 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    It does bring into question Tesla's supposed plan to put other models on the road over the next several years, not to mention Tesla's assertion that they will be expanding sales of the Model S. According to this, Panasonic expects Tesla's sales to be basically flat at 20,000 vehicles/year. And Tesla will need a new contract to supply batteries for the Model X.
    21 Aug 2013, 01:12 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, Also need to think about the fact that as Tesla scales, hoping to expand with new models, it becomes imperative that they have more than one source for batteries. Also, prices never fall as fast if you lock in with one supplier. Get multiple suppliers and they manage themselves toward more efficient, read lower, prices.
    21 Aug 2013, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • IINDelco,
    Understood. But you have to wonder, if John is correct about Panasonic's losses on the Li-ion cells they are currently selling to Tesla, who is going to be lining up to sell Tesla Li-ion cells at even more of a loss?
    21 Aug 2013, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech, The Japanese are not known for being the lowest cost producer. So who gets up to an acceptable quality level at a lower cost along with some level of advancements in the next couple of years? There should be some improvements but the question remaining is how much can be expected.
    21 Aug 2013, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • Looks like they are turning things around...


    from an Indian Times article...
    "Panasonic's small lithium-ion battery division had a standout April-June quarter with a 4.1 billion yen operating profit and a 5.8 percent margin, marking a turnaround from a 2 billion yen loss in the same period last year. "
    21 Aug 2013, 09:08 PM Reply Like
  • LOL, its amazing how good the Quarter AFTER you write off billions of dollars in assets looks as you operate those assets for "free".
    22 Aug 2013, 08:17 AM Reply Like
  • ARCA made its appearance now on the ask $0.162 below the best offer of $0.1644 at the time. Look for ARCA, ATDF, CDEL & others to jostle now.


    21 Aug 2013, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • >H.T.Love ... The skyrocket fizzles again.
    21 Aug 2013, 11:24 AM Reply Like
  • DRich: Yep! As I said in my EOD, it looked like lots of profit-taking still and I thought the push up couldn't continue.


    I think we all are in agreement that big news, near-term, will be needed to get a sustainable move. Assuming that's sales upon which financial projections can be based, that might be sustainable.


    I am pulling for VW's Sept. NS-999 to make an appearance for at least an improvement in the sentiment here even if it doesn't move the price a lot right away. But I'm "expecting the worst and hoping for the best" so I can't be too disappointed, JIC.


    21 Aug 2013, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • HTL,


    Agreed, all we need is for TG to follow through in his promise!


    "and I expect to report a combination of confirmed orders and initial sales in these markets before our next quarterly earnings call in mid November".


    If TG promised it then we should just expect that it will happen right?? I believe everyone really wants to believe TG but the failed deliveries from the past has caused us to pull back on our trust and faith a little? But if he should happen to give us a combination of significant orders can you imagine how that should effect this story! Being the gambler that I am and since I have lived my entire life on the edge anyway I am back on the buy side once again. I picked up another 50k shares below $.15 and lowered on overall to under $.30. We have a little sell off taking place today on low volume so far and I am actually looking for a late afternoon run back to $.16.


    Of course I do not have a real clue but I can entertain myself with these thoughts. No I put the computer on hold as I head to the beach for my daily routine of 5 miles in the sand and ocean wave splash. A great way to meditate!


    Good luck to all who can endure the patience game here!


    PS: Has there been talk yet regarding who will be attempting to attend the shareholders meeting? I am looking into making the journey myself and was just wondering.
    21 Aug 2013, 01:41 PM Reply Like
  • RBryn: "... late afternoon run back to $.16".


    If that happens I'll be surprised. I had a thought occur to me a bit ago that I'll post below.


    21 Aug 2013, 01:53 PM Reply Like
  • Oops, just got back from the beach and see that my late day rally hopes did the opposite! Ha! That's what I get for being optimistic!
    21 Aug 2013, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun, Two "sunny beaches" in one day. One far more pleasant than the other.
    21 Aug 2013, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • Supercapacitors Amp Up as an Alternative to Batteries

    21 Aug 2013, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • Imagine if someone could develop a battery that combined the features of both a traditional battery and a supercapacitor ... like say a PbC battery ...
    21 Aug 2013, 01:20 PM Reply Like
  • Greentongue, Stop dreaming. It'll never happen. ;-O
    21 Aug 2013, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • Left coast games.


    Is SoCal Edison Attacking Home Power Solar Energy Storage?

    21 Aug 2013, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • What accounted for all the recent volume and positive price movement? Shoot! I don't know, but it petered out too fast to be the result of what Jveal and Geopark mentioned I think.


    Got to thinking about the boost in short interest that climbed starting on the 5/31 report and flattened, apparently on the 7/15 report.



    I'm thinking we had the euivalent of a short squeeze without the squeeze.


    Average of VWAPs in the two weeks prior to the 5/31 report and through the subsequent weeks including the 7/15 report was $0.2504, $0.2626, $0.2343, 0.1774 and $0.1513.


    The average over the whole period was $0.2155.


    As I commented in either one of my EOD posts or some comment, I suspected shorting would cease and that seems to be confirmed by the "flat" interest in the last to reporting periods.


    Now, if you're a shorter and see, e.g., a potential profit of 0.3469% if you do covering buys at $0.16 or less, would you decide to take profits with the way our price has been acting and knowing that another large infusion of shares was on the way to the market? Add in the upside risk from an (NSC) action from September forward, TG promising substantial news for the next quarterly report, ...


    So that's what I was thinking of as "short squeeze w/o the squeeze". The shorter could afford to cover at, essentially, any price available on the ask with out substantial damage to the profit in percentage or dollar terms.


    So, I combine my thought (apparently with supporting evidence) that they stopped shorting, that our pop was more of a "phht" in duration, that we have upside risk to the shorter and a nice profit if covering buys are done at this level ...


    Someone remind me to check the short report Monday and see if our short interest declined substantially. Our volume here over four days makes me think it's likely. There may be more to it, but I suspect this is part of the action we saw.


    21 Aug 2013, 02:16 PM Reply Like