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 (246)
Track new comments
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    There's a first time for everything, I guess.

     

    Still no word from Mr. Averill regarding my question

     

    :-(
    10 Aug 2014, 06:07 AM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    [DDG answers the intercom after comandeering an investment station]
    DDG: [sounding official] Uh, everything's under control. Situation normal.
    Investor: What happened?
    DDG: [getting nervous] Uh, we had a slight revenue malfunction, but uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
    Investor: We're sending a Director.
    DDG: Uh, uh... negative, negative. We had a cash flow leak here now. Give us a few minutes to lock it down. Large leak, very dangerous.
    Investor: Who is this? What's your working cash flow?
    DDG: Uh...
    [DDG shoots the intercom]
    DDG: [muttering] Boring conversation anyway. Guys, WE'RE GONNA HAVE DILUTION!

     

    JP, I've been away for a few weeks. Was wondering which concentrator had your most recent ePower update? Thanks.
    10 Aug 2014, 06:07 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Dilution is a choice, not an imposition. It's a choice each stockholder makes for himself in the quiet of his room.

     

    Imagine a partnership where Larry and Moe decide to open a high-end wine and cheese shop in a transitional neighborhood. In the short term it will be a money loser and in the long term it will be a cash cow. The transition happens more slowly than Larry and Moe expected, but it's progressing nicely when they run out of operating cash. As the first step go to their neighborhood banker who denies their request because their business doesn't generate enough cash flow to service a loan. At that point Larry and Moe have a tough choice, they can either come up with more capital from their own pockets or they can bring in Curley as a partner, which would dilute both of their interests.

     

    The stockholders of a public company make exactly the same decision when they choose to sit tight on X,000 shares instead of increasing their investment to Y,000. They may not get to participate in every offering, but they always have opportunities to retain something very close to their original ownership percentage in the open market.

     

    In the oil business when two or more partners own a lease and one decides he doesn't want to pay his share of excess exploration, development and operating costs, he can opt-out of the expenditure and hold on to his cash, but if he does his participation is reduced to zero until the paying parties recover 400% to 500% of their excess investment.

     

    ePower updates are published in my Instablog, rather than the Concentrators.
    10 Aug 2014, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    Actually wasn't being serious JP, I just thought the concentrator needs a few more Star Wars references. There is a little Star Wars in all of us. We all want to be Hans Solo but most of us end up more like Jar Jar Binks. My wife thinks I am starting to look more like Jubba the Hutt. maybe it is Axion Power related comfort eating. Thanks for the ePower info. Will check out your Instablog forthwith.
    10 Aug 2014, 06:09 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    @dance: speaking of Star Wars references, how about Yoda? What if that "Yoda" is a director (or a very recent director) of a Publicly-Traded-Nano-Cap, who holds significant material information, not available to the public. What if "Yoda" was renegotiating... oh... I don't know... say... 3/4 of a million dollars of debt in an effort to secure it to Intellectual Property of said Nano-Cap, at the expense of legacy shareholders?

     

    And uses a public forum, such as (Seeking Alpha) as a springboard to jawbone and influence negotiations (as well as the stock price) for personal financial gain?

     

    Oh wait... that couldn't happen.... never mind. Carry o n, carry on...
    10 Aug 2014, 08:35 PM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    Beware we must!
    11 Aug 2014, 05:52 AM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    Can you explain your hump with Mr Anvill a little more Razor. I think I am behind the curve on this one. What do you think he is trying to achieve?
    11 Aug 2014, 05:54 AM Reply Like
  • jakurtz
    , contributor
    Comments (1960) | Send Message
     
    Bob, Thanks for your participation here.

     

    Could you share your thoughts/opinion on whether the PbC has been ready for effective marketing since 2006-07 or did its fabrication process i.e. carbon sheeting line need to be more refined before it Axion could really commercialize the PbC?
    10 Aug 2014, 08:17 AM Reply Like
  • Bob Averill
    , contributor
    Comments (590) | Send Message
     
    Jakurtz,

     

    If landing orders to buy ~500,000 PbC batteries a year constitutes "commercialization", then yes, just as it was claimed by management during that approximate time frame, Axion had a workable but perhaps not yet profitable process for filling those PbC battery orders in 2007-8. As they say "necessity is the mother of invention" so if orders had started pouring in, the manufacturing process advancements would arguably have come on line far earlier than they have.

     

    But that's history, Axion now has a new CEO and likely new funding and I hope a plan that they will share with us for how Axion is to become a commercial success in 2015.
    11 Aug 2014, 08:08 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    IIRC the processes that existed in 2007-8 involved hand making every component. The primary use of proceeds from the Quercus financing was developing and building an automated line to laminate electrode assemblies. The carbon sheeting process wasn't fully automated until the spring 2013.

     

    I don't recall ever seeing a per unit cost analysis on the 2007-8 prototypes, but I have to imagine it was a very big number because of high labor costs.

     

    If Axion had landed orders to build a substantial volume of PbCs in 2007-8, the required capital investments in new plant, equipment and employee training would have been enormous. Small projects like the NYSERDA subcontract were within Axion's technical and financial reach, but I'd have a hard time arguing that it could have managed or paid for anything much bigger.
    11 Aug 2014, 08:25 AM Reply Like
  • jakurtz
    , contributor
    Comments (1960) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Bob. One of my investing thesis on Axion was that management had a plan to perfect and refine the PbC before releasing it to the market where it could have potentially been refined and perfected by a competitor. If, however, they sold it in trickles in 2008 it may have given competition time to make it better and take the market from them if they couldn't defend it with IP.

     

    Your being a part of the board and formerly engineer of several companies that manufactured medical industry prosthetics gave a lot of weight to my investment. I felt your experience and knowledge was surely being used by management to figure out what the best way forward was to get the PbC to market. I concluded that your experience must have been that the company should wait to mass-release until the products manufacturing process is as good as it can reasonably be, but you are saying that was not necessarily your advice or approach. It is important to me that you feel Axion could have been selling this for some time and not have been taking too much additional hidden risk.

     

    That is all in the past now but it helps me going forward with other investments.
    11 Aug 2014, 08:29 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    Good stuff, jakurtz.

     

    There is a long history of disagreement between John and Bob on the timing of market-readiness and manufacturability.

     

    IMO, your tying in the issue of IP and/or trade secret protection adds depth and focuses on an important consideration that has not been given its proper due.

     

    "If, however, they sold it in trickles in 2008 it may have given competition time to make it better and take the market from them if they couldn't defend it with IP." Good comment, IMO.

     

    This blog have tended to skirt IP issues and "leave the patents to the pros". This has come up wrt EP and the UB as well, so the issue remains relevant in the present.

     

    "It is important to me that you [Bob Averill] feel Axion could have been selling this for some time and not have been taking too much additional hidden risk."

     

    Bob, Do you still believe Axion should open its doors and phone lines and sell PbCs to the general public? In other words, do you believe Axion's IP/trade secrets are secure enough to do so now?
    13 Aug 2014, 05:11 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Like Bob I was upset that some of Axion's early projects fell through. NYSERDA would have been a great test bed that didn't cost too much but when the prime contractor goes bust there isn't much a sub-contractor can do.

     

    From my perspective it all boiled down to money. Marketing is costly. When your manufacturing processes are rudimentary and customers are cost sensitive, it can easily cost more to make a product than you can sell it for. The market never reacts well when the cost of goods sold line is significantly higher than the sales revenue line, particularly if jerks like me make snide comments about buying for a dime, selling for a nickel and making it up on volume.

     

    When selling a product costs more than it brings in and marketing a product increases your SG&A, I tend to believe that carefully targeted small sales with high information quotients are more economic and sensible than a major push to sell lots of product at a loss.

     

    The capital markets are very tough and until you can make a product for a cost that approximates the sales price, major marketing efforts can only increase your losses and compound your financing problems.

     

    It's never an easy choice when you can sell a little product, get a lot of information and lose $10 million a year, or sell a lot of product and get marginally better information while losing $20 or $30 million a year.

     

    Reasonable men can differ and while I don't always agree with Bob, I don't know that his position would unreasonable in a company with a big war chest to finance the push.
    13 Aug 2014, 07:32 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John,

     

    If we IGNORE COMPLETELY the IP issue, then it boils down to the financial, as you say: "Mass marketing" is an easier choice when the money is easy, tougher when it's tough.

     

    That's the financial case you have made very well in the past. With your additional caveat that each sale you are forced to make at a loss also must have the added value of providing quality feedback.

     

    The questions I am asking Bob are more specifically targeting his take on the IP / trade secret issue jakurtz tied in.
    13 Aug 2014, 07:52 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    An example of the deep pockets approach.

     

    SolarCity Loss Widens as New Rooftop Installations Surge

     

    http://bloom.bg/1vH6ZA8
    -
    On the other hand you mention relative to ePower that data generated from customers experience will be much more credible than what you can put together on the truck if it's driven internally. The trust factor. Unfortunately Axions primary sales tool for the PowerCube is sitting under Axions administration. And they are in that business known for selling based on a great deal of half truths.

     

    So would a partially sponsored off site PowerCube some years ago perhaps have given Axion more of an edge in their sales efforts? Isn't that in effect what you will be doing when you put ePower owned assets into fleet manager hands for short initial trial runs?
    13 Aug 2014, 08:08 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Edmund> I'm not as concerned about protecting the IP as many people are because there's a pretty good road map in the patents and we had a pretty good road map when we started in 2004. The trick has never been clever and easily copied component and device designs. Instead the challenge has been knowing what we wanted the components to do and finding optimal ways to make the darned things. I'll be fascinated to hear Bob's take on the IP issues, and I may even learn something in the process.

     

    Iindy> In a lot of ways ePower is luckier than Axion because almost everything we use in our drivetrain is made by somebody else and the bulk of our future economies will come volume discounts rather than better fabrication methods.

     

    When it comes to proof of performance I think Axion has an easier road because it's much harder to game the results of a stationary energy storage installation than it is to game fuel economy testing. When a PowerCube gets a performance signal from PJM it either responds or it doesn't and the details are logged in either event. While results from an off-site PC will be more credible than results from an on-site, PC, I don't think Axion will face the same level of "I'm not trusting anything but my own experience" we expect at ePower.
    13 Aug 2014, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    "I tend to believe that carefully targeted small sales with high information quotients are more economic and sensible"

     

    this line of thinking is exactly why AXPW is where it is.

     

    Very much 19th century thinking.

     

    They have carefully targeted "small sales" alright...and diluted legacy shareholders beer with whiskey or should it be vs. versa?

     

    AXPW's sales history is living proof.

     

    One other thing, would you have built the PC that is at AXPW now? There were no sales or orders for it...
    Didn't know if it would work or not....
    it cost money (manhole covers and how many additional shares of stock?) that AXPW did not have

     

    But now the survival of the company depends on the PC for near term sales.
    BA and Ed Buiel wanted to put batteries into product developers hands so they could build more "plug in ready" products....
    13 Aug 2014, 08:32 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I'm happy to accept your reasoning LT, but only if you can show me where the money to finance your approach will come from. Axion's founders (especially Bob) went way beyond the realm of reason with their contributions during the early days. Quercus was a god-send and I think we got a better deal than we really deserved. The 2009 financing was another minor miracle, although I think the price was low.

     

    To paraphrase Conchita the border town fun girl, "You speak of marketing Señor but you have no pesos."

     

    You show me where the capital to offset the losses will come from and I'll buy into the idea of making for a dime, selling for a nickel and covering the losses a couple years down the road.

     

    Near term sales of the PbC are meaningless and it's absurd to argue that Axion can't survive if it isn't profitable, or at least cash flow positive. You're trying to use mature company metrics to evaluate a corporate adolescent with a completely new product that's just leaving the R&D stage. We're at the very beginning of the hype cycle, not the bitter end.

     

    Axion needs enough sales to establish a credible path to future profitability. Nothing more and nothing less.
    13 Aug 2014, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    it's not about "where will it come from" it's that AXPW "DID SPEND" the money they received and have very little to show for it.

     

    Others with far more knowledge and experience than me have said the same thing....BA, EB, iindelco just said why not have built a second PC and put it in a real companies hands to prove it ?
    13 Aug 2014, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    let me ask you another question..

     

    How much "profit" had AXPW realized from ePower to date ? Be sure to count engineering and support that's been spent too for how many batteries delivered and paid for?

     

    or are they taking the road we wanted long ago and investing in the future by putting the battery in someones hand that is going to use it in the real world?
    13 Aug 2014, 08:53 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    LT, re': "BA and Ed Buiel wanted to put batteries into product developers hands so they could build more "plug in ready" products.... "

     

    Ex-employees who are deep underwater long after they expected to make a killing are justifiably upset. That leads to looking for excuses and scapegoats, someone else to blame. This line of thinking is very human in every century ever.

     

    Now that all that is in the past and the venting has subsided, I am interested in the current thinking about the present and future.

     

    So to repeat my query, for Bob's convenience: Bob, Do you still believe Axion should open its doors and phone lines and sell PbCs to the general public? In other words, do you believe Axion's IP/trade secrets are secure enough to do so now?

     

    What those "plug-in" products might be is a separate subject, not to mention one of my favorites.
    13 Aug 2014, 08:54 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Show me the money!

     

    Axion is not making money on its sales to ePower yet because the support services are so extensive. Like its work with BMW, NS, GM and heaven only knows who else, Axion's work with ePower is carefully targeted small sales with extremely high information quotients because we're demanding far more performance from the PbC than you could ever imagine.

     

    ePower has a long list of challenges to deal with including the long-term performance of the PbC. Regardless of what happens to ePower Axion will get far more information value from our work than it sacrifices in opportunity costs. We are the are third party proof that the PbC is tough as a boars nose.
    13 Aug 2014, 08:54 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    I think the grid-tied double inversion converter by Vichnyakov is one of a small group of high-power electronics (inverters, converters, et al.) that Axion would like to have been able to contribute to (or contract) the development of, had they been financially capable and intellectually confident.

     

    Perhaps they were neither.

     

    Do we know for a fact that Axion's R&D group is NOT working on these kinds of projects? DO we know if they ever have? What would be the cost of contracting for a specific product development - if under NDA?

     

    Assuming Axion is not able to assist because of financial limitations, is that sufficient reason to throw reason to the wind with respect to IP / trade secret concerns in order to sell batteries to every Tom, Dick and Harry tinkerer?

     

    Are there (or were there) any solid reasons for IP / trade secret concerns or was the decision to forego this type of mass marketing purely nixed as a no-go on the money-front?
    13 Aug 2014, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    With respect to the demands ePower is placing on the PbC SuperCabattery pack, until I hear a problem, I want the batteries to be asked to do more.

     

    The experiment with four LESS batteries was informative, I'm sure. At the time of that experiment, I suggested a second experiment: Four MORE batteries to raise the voltage from the pack, perhaps as a means of making them work harder or at a lower state of charge or over a greater swing of SOC.

     

    It was a suggestion, not necessarily a good one. However, as I recall, Bob suggested adding a cell to each of the existing 30H batteries to bump their voltage to ~14 to accomplish the same thing. I always wondered if that were possible as I thought the battery cases were pretty much jam-packed for a variety of reasons, but I liked the idea. I wasn't in the mood to say so at the time, however.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    "With respect to the demands ePower is placing on the PbC SuperCabattery pack, until I hear a problem, I want the batteries to be asked to do more."

     

    Edmund, My biggest fear for ePower/Axion is the lack of any real durability data on the system. I do however temper this fear somewhat because I know that even though data is not being shared directly, I can be assured some of Axions experience with their other partners is coming into play in their application recommendations/tuning. It's only natural that this would be the case. However the ePower application is unique and there is no replacement for some good ole field testing at extremes.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:34 AM Reply Like
  • Bob Averill
    , contributor
    Comments (590) | Send Message
     
    Edmund,

     

    I obviously can't get involved in any discussion of specific strengths or weaknesses of Axion’s intellectual property but there are a few general comments/observations that I am willing to make.

     

    The first thing to understand about US patents is that they are only valid if they teach those knowledgeable in the art how to make at least the preferred embodiment of the invention. This makes to premise that you can prevent others from learning how to make your patented product by not making the product itself available to individuals or corporations something of a contradiction.

     

    Axion’s past 10-K filings reveal the fact that at the end or 2005 Axion still had just the four US patents that came out of their deal with C&T. Just three years later at the end of 2008 Axion had already added five US patents giving them a total of nine and they had learned how to make full sized batteries at the LAB factory in New Castle and were apparently confident enough in the performance and quality of those products to send them to third party installations for field evaluation. The “know-how” that Axion acquired from C&T and then accumulated on their own by the end of 2008 was a very important part of their intellectual property. By the end of 2008 Axion had obviously come a very long way from where they had been in Canada.

     

    By the end of 2013 Axion had added another four US patents giving them a total of thirteen, and added automation to various aspects of the carbon electrode production and presumably had added a lot more in the way of trade secrets to their list of intellectual property.

     

    I find it difficult to see how anyone could view Axion’s IP as a factor that could or should have impeded the growth of sales.

     

    If anyone needs further added reasons for believing in Axion’s IP, perhaps John might comment on Axion's past investment groups and the nature of their standard due diligence regarding IP.
    13 Aug 2014, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2851) | Send Message
     
    JP/Ed etc. - and Axion CANNOT afford to apply (vis waste) it's precious resources except on the most promising of golden goose/egg opportunities. It's a matter of resource limitations and priorities. The Tom, Dick and Harry stuff is nothing more than distractions, short of Tom Dick and Harry paying big time not only for what they get, but what Axion loses just to entertain them. Keep the main thing the main thing.

     

    Now, if some plug-in product guys want to belly up with "show me the money", maybe - and then the value of that/those applications v/s the ones already under consideration (and testing, etc), by Axion and it's current partners get highest priority consideration.

     

    As we have seen, the wisdom must include a little flexibility, or else ePower would not have gotten a look. So, I have no problem with Axion's execution.

     

    Double that with the Cummin's opportunity.

     

    All that while BMW fiddled.

     

    I don't believe Axion has been blind, except purposely where wisdom dictates.
    13 Aug 2014, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    My involvement in IP due diligence was typically tangential. At a minimum significant investors would hire patent counsel who would go through the patents with a fine toothed comb and then discuss any concerns or issues with Axion's patent counsel. For more extensive investigations the investors would hire engineers who would discuss the technical engineering aspects with Axion's engineers. In both cases, the securities lawyer is more of a traffic coordinator than anything else.
    13 Aug 2014, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    The previous NS-999 roll-out was in September. Do you think that this version will also be rolled out then?
    Is there a specific reason for September?

     

    * We would like to see some active prep for the roll-out, especially as September is quickly approaching.
    10 Aug 2014, 08:24 AM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (821) | Send Message
     
    About 3 weeks or so ago I learned some information that I have been reluctant to post due to the fact that I will not be able to provide substantiation of my source. Since this is the case please feel free to label this as a rumor and dismiss it at will. But since the recent release of the S1 and the discussion of the $2 million cap ex monies I decided to throw this out into the speculation!

     

    With that said, I heard that a "bunch" of PbC batteries had been shipped to a Truck OEM!

     

    It is my speculation that this "bunch" of batteries could possibly be for a fleet test for a potential stop/start initiative that has been ongoing for approximately 18 months or longer. Of course it could also be something like the APU application.

     

    A question for iindelco or anyone; approximately how long could it take for a successful fleet test before talks of a production run could start to take place? Is this a 6 month or potential multi year process?
    10 Aug 2014, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19491) | Send Message
     
    RBrun: did the source indicate any rough time-frame, e.g. before EOQ or after?

     

    Would be nice to see some $ appear in AR from prior-to-EOQ shipment!!

     

    HardToLove
    10 Aug 2014, 09:14 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    RB - My binary-guess is multi-year. Even in rush panic mode, I doubt any OEM could build, fleet test, and schedule for production in less than a year.

     

    Whether start/stop or APU, there are hundreds or thousands of other parts that need to be specified and qualified before it can enter commercial production.
    10 Aug 2014, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • Amouna
    , contributor
    Comments (2001) | Send Message
     
    If the rumor is confirmed and the customer allows Axion to release the news, it could do wonders to the stock price and finally put the company on the radar of large institutional investors, particularly with the coming up-listing!
    10 Aug 2014, 09:44 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    Oh Yeah. An APU set up was the whole reason I was searching for battery solutions when I found this APC years ago. With the anti-idle laws, I spent many uncomfortable nights on the I-15 between Las Vegas and Baker CA. I could let the truck idle and get some good rest while worrying about getting a ticket or slowly roast unable to sleep. Of course the company was split on it as they wanted well rested and safe drivers, yet didn't want to waste the fuel or have drivers that lost points on their CDL ( or have the added cost of a small genset).
    10 Aug 2014, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    RBrun, My answer to your thoughts on timing is "it depends". As it relates to Rick Krementz's point it depends on the type of program being launched. For instance is it a full blown development program from concept thought launch? Or is it a program with a new BMS and a revised energy storage system with the balance of the system already in service?

     

    Then one has to ask what the program entails. If it's for SS the ramifications for failure might be worse than if it was for a UPS. The former perhaps being a safety related issue or certainly more of a customer dissatisfier. Also, is there a back-up plan? Can they launch with LABs and PbC offering price point A and B with the opportunity to swap batteries and an electronic module if one doesn't work out? Also, what is the volume of the program? Are we talking 5k units/year or 500k?

     

    What I'm getting at is a point I've made in the past a couple times. It all comes down to "Risk Management". We don't know for sure the exact application and it's associated timing/program detail so it's hard for us to define an appropriate launch program with its associated tasks to best manage the risks within the time required to meet the business objectives of the customer.

     

    I've never worked on class 7 or 8 applications but I've been around people that have. In some of the larger programs, where the vehicle was heavily redesigned from the ground up, the launch phases were very much like automotive and quite long. Then I've also seen minor initiatives where many components were carry over and certain aspects of "Normal" program launch requirements were skipped or heavily compressed/overlapped. See it all depends on the individual risks of each component or system in the overall program. How to manage the risks depending on the cost of failure in the most efficient, time and money, manner. There just is no way we can come up with the correct path with the information supplied so far.

     

    I did work on what was referred to as the GM P-Truck program many moons ago. It was a platform that serviced anything from US Postal vehicles to Frito Lay sized box delivery vehicles. In the program I'm referring to the volumes were quite low vs GM volumes during that era and the risks in my sub system area supplied were quite low so the program for my team was quite short and simple even though it was a system covered by FMVSS. The team presented a launch plan with appropriate risk management and it was accepted internally and by the customers.
    10 Aug 2014, 10:54 AM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    A supporting data point is the appearance / reappearance of a Truck OEM SS mention in the investor presentation slides, dated July 2014.
    10 Aug 2014, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    This is a discussion where Stilldazed or Tim Enright might be able to add some clarity by sharing what they know about battery replacement cycles in medium and heavy duty trucks. It would be even better if they knew how the replacement cycles vary between long haul and local haul duty cycles. I have heard that medium duty local delivery trucks run through their batteries very quickly, but there's a big difference between believing and knowing.
    10 Aug 2014, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    iindelco - You are right, "it depends". I was assuming (without justification) a new APU from scratch, which requires modifications to the wiring harness, dashboard controls, and interfaces to logic boards and communications.

     

    If the truck already has a functioning APU system based on traditional lead batteries, changing to PbC could be rather simple. Not drop-in simple, but fairly straightforward, with 99% of the parts unchanged.

     

    Could it really get through QC, Supply Chain, manufacturing engineering and regulatory oversight in less than a year? I don't know.
    10 Aug 2014, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Rick, Right. We are on the same page on this point.

     

    I do wonder how certain levels of trucking would accept SS. I would think the long haul guys would say "no way" while the delivery guys would be far more receptive given many like the United PS guys are already doing this manually. That's OK because if correct the local delivery guys really have the drive cycle where it makes the most sense.

     

    One other point. If RBrun's timing is correct it's already been over a year. But the initial talks would have been more financial only discussions for some time and hashing out agreements. I do kind of think Uninterruptible PS would allow for a more compressed time to launch than SS in most cases but in reality I really don't know. It's just a feeling. Probably more out of ignorance on my part than not.
    10 Aug 2014, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    Really interesting rumor, RB. On might remember though ePower is a truck OEM and recently purchased four trucks to rebuild at 56 PbCs per truck. 4 X 56 might qualify as "a bunch". OTOH, we have had prior commentary in quarterly CC Axion working with one or more large, well established truck OEMs and the capital investment plans may have nothing to do with trucking OEMs.

     

    S1 "Use of Proceeds" data showing $2 million capital expenditures was interesting in and of itself, but provision of $2.5 million working capital in addition to the cap ex REALLY caught my eye. $2.5 million would finance a doubling of Axion's inventory as of March 31. Makes me wonder if the offering will finance a replication of both carbon sheeting and robotic electrode assembly lines at a location other than New Castle. Past CC commentary has included references to working with at least two larger, more established battery OEMs -- one on introductions by/through BMW and one that approached Axion directly.
    10 Aug 2014, 12:09 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    ePower has not recently received a battery shipment.
    10 Aug 2014, 12:58 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (821) | Send Message
     
    HTL,

     

    I was told of the shipment around the middle of July and it was presented as it had been recent!

     

    I understand this provides little clarity in regards to timing but does not eliminate the possibility of it being prior the end of June.
    10 Aug 2014, 01:25 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19491) | Send Message
     
    RBrun: Thanks. At least I'll not be "hoping" to see an enlarged AR or COH that could lead to mild disappointment.

     

    Leaves the door open for a pleasant surprise too.

     

    HardToLove
    10 Aug 2014, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • geopark
    , contributor
    Comments (332) | Send Message
     
    RBrun . . Your last 'rumor' post (quiet period) proved true to my eye so this post has added credence.

     

    I continue to like the risk/reward ratio @ this price (sub .10) and will consider further trading position spec purchases per the old Wall Street adage "buy the rumor, sell the fact".
    10 Aug 2014, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (821) | Send Message
     
    geo,

     

    Thanks for the vote of confidence, much appreciated.

     

    I found the info encouraging but unfortunately I have no idea on timelines which would be the real powerful info! I am just "hopeful" that maybe the engineering has been ongoing for a long time and now the fleet test or similar stage is started. As mentioned by many here much more knowgeable that I that this could take a long time or not! The mystery continues!

     

    The good news is that a "bunch" of batteries have been received by a truck company so they continue to move forward and I believe that provides additional validation that the PbC continues to perform in this (whatever it is) application!
    10 Aug 2014, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "I was told of the shipment around the middle of July and it was presented as it had been recent! "

     

    Hmmm. DGG was named CEO/Chairman on July 8. Could it be shipment of "a bunch" of PbCs to a trucking OEM was a first sale on his watch?
    10 Aug 2014, 11:41 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    I would have thought they would have to report it. Almost any sale is a material event to AXPW, even the ePower 50-60 batteries, the Naval building of 30 batteries....so why not this ?
    11 Aug 2014, 04:35 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    A sale isn't material under SEC rules until it represents 10% of last year's revenue. Smaller sales might justify a press release from a PR perspective, but they don't require a press release from a disclosure perspective. When you're in a quiet period, you only release the information the rules require you to release.

     

    In an application like stop-start, an engine manufacturer can do a lot of work with a small number of batteries - as in 25 vehicles per 100 batteries. If a customer doesn't want you talking about it's activities and won't allow you to mention its name, even a mandatory release will seem pretty innocuous.
    11 Aug 2014, 06:39 AM Reply Like
  • Al Marshall
    , contributor
    Comments (631) | Send Message
     
    RBrun: Thanks for the info. If a "bunch" of batteries is in the thousands then that is something that will stand out in the financial statement. If it is a few hundred then it won't because my guess is that Axion has been selling 2000+ batteries a year for the past 3 years or so.

     

    This is based on the non-contract revenue representing PbC and antique vehicle batteries with the latter assumed to be about $100k per quarter. That would leave about $1m/year for PbC (I didn't look at recent quarters but that was the number in the 2011-2012 timeframe).

     

    So, in recent years I would expect there have been at least a handful of occasions where Axion has shipped a few hundred batteries to a customer. That's all good news but in reality just a few more grains of sand on the pile. Hopefully the grain of sand you reported turns out to be the one that causes the avalanche!
    12 Aug 2014, 11:13 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    ii,
    In my innocence, at the beginning of my search for an APU battery setup, I figured a battery setup of 4 batteries converted to AC. With the ac power an off the shelf RV air conditioning unit could be run by the batteries converted to AC or external 110v plug. The PBC fit the bill as when on battery power, when the batteries got too low the engine could kick on to quickly recharge the batteries (high charge acceptance). I was guestimating maybe 3 quick recharges in a 10 hour break. Using off the shelf parts made it a slam dunk. Little did I know.......
    10 Aug 2014, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Back when Tom discussed the APU work Axion was doing, he made a point of emphasizing that they were also working on a far bigger opportunity in medium and heavy duty trucking.

     

    The global census of trucks that can benefit from better APUs is small and there are several viable options in the market.

     

    The global census of trucks that can benefit from robust stop-start systems is immense, and I don't know of any storage devices other than the PbC and Maxwell supercapactitors that can stand up to the duty cycle.

     

    Axion's latest investor presentation doesn't even mention APU applications, but does talk about a "Stop/Start Initiative with a Diesel Engine Manufacturer."

     

    I've already explained why I think the diesel engine manufacturer is Big Red, but I'm sure they won't let Axion talk until they're darned good and ready. Big Red recently made splash over their collaboration BAE to add stop-start functionality to small numbers of hybrid transit buses.

     

    http://yhoo.it/1nFBsF1

     

    Can you imagine what they'd have to say if they could offer stop-start functionality for every diesel engine they manufacture?
    10 Aug 2014, 11:47 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Stilldazed, So based on what you know now, ignoring the integration aspect, what are the technical aspects that would draw you to PbC vs the most appropriate LABs for UPS in an RV application?
    10 Aug 2014, 11:48 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    ii - the high charge rate. "Dribble charging" at 10 to 20 amps is a pain. "Fire hose charging" at 100 amps per battery (times 4 batteries) for the bulk of the charging cycle, that's the winner.

     

    More likely, two 200-250 amp alternators, and then you have backup, too. Some info on large alternators http://bit.ly/1nFDBQR
    10 Aug 2014, 12:12 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Rick, that's what I figured as being the most advantageous characteristic of the PbC. However with the reduce total capacity the frequency of charge events would go up and depending on some usage patterns this MIGHT be an issue for some? Then one needs to factor in life and obviously overall system costs depending on what the operator is most looking to achieve. I also do wonder how many people abuse their battery systems by not managing them properly during under utilization periods? I know from listening to a small sampling of motorcycle riders and smaller boat owners many do not manage their batteries very well if left to their own administration. This reduced maintenance might be a big factor for some as well?

     

    I could see how targeting this market would require a different distribution model vs the biggies. An obvious consideration.
    10 Aug 2014, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • geopark
    , contributor
    Comments (332) | Send Message
     
    Pardon my ignorance, Big Red is BAE? Wikipedia gives me a soft drink or cinnamon bun.
    10 Aug 2014, 01:52 PM Reply Like
  • dastar
    , contributor
    Comments (274) | Send Message
     
    Cummins.
    10 Aug 2014, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • geopark
    , contributor
    Comments (332) | Send Message
     
    Thanks.
    10 Aug 2014, 02:18 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "Thanks Rick, that's what I figured as being the most advantageous characteristic of the PbC. However with the reduce total capacity the frequency of charge events would go up and depending on some usage patterns this MIGHT be an issue for some?"

     

    Many years ago my Dad used to ask occasionally if I was sure I did not "know" just enough to be dangerous to myself. The thought might be appropriate here when I pose use of 16v PbCs as possible work-around to increased frequency of charge events. Ed Buiel's yadoddle remarks included one indicating Axion's dual 12v, 16v start/stop system proposal would/should support auto "hotel" loads for 10 minutes using the conventional 14v battery charge system used for LABs. (I interpreted the comment(s) as suggesting PbC operating in 10v - 14v range.)
    10 Aug 2014, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    The engine block, and associated assemblage, on a Cummins diesel is red.
    10 Aug 2014, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    D-inv, That's why I was happy to see the operational voltage bands in the BMW presentation posted the other day. It is supportive of thoughts relative to how much you can get out of a storage solution like the PbC that doesn't have a flatter voltage discharge profile w/o putting in expensive electronics to compensate. We would never get to see information like this were it not for certain industries having to develop and agree to some common standards in order to gain economic advantage. In some areas the autos need to compete and in others they need to harmonize solutions to be viable.

     

    I got sick of listening to the trolls yammering on and on about what a disadvantage the discharge curve was for PbC. Well in some apps it is. In others it's a great advantage because you can use it to measure state of charge with great accuracy. It's all a matter of what you need to accomplish while looking at the trade offs of each solution. I remain convinced that current VRLA solutions for things like SS are not so great and as you place more and more tasks on them they only get worse.

     

    So does PbC find a place or do we get knocked out by the Ultrabattery which I consider to be theft of PbC patents and a compromised solution. Although I could be walking on thin ice or in fact all wet on the patent point..
    10 Aug 2014, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    The discharge profile of an Ultrabattery is not like that of a PbC supercabattery, but of a typical LAB.

     

    The problems the Ultrabattery technology had in the Uber-installation at Lyon Station are much like what you would expect of an LAB. I cannot recall if the installation is still under study, which would be awesome since it would mean the data would be public eventually. October or January?

     

    The Ultrabattery patent does allow for one or more of their "hybrid" PB/C negative electrodes to be constructed of 100% activated carbon, however, so it would seem they could easily move the product in the direcion of a PbC.

     

    With the revelation that Axion's previous R&D Director just wrote East Penn's most recent patent and the recent departure from Axion of Vladimir Vichnyakov, the IP and trade secrets could come under pressure from more than one source.

     

    I recall PbC Believer had quite a few choice comments on this subject. Hopefully we can clear some of those up now and get some answers and commentary as to the perception of strength of Axion's IP position as well as any thoughts re' the CSIRO patent threat, if there is one.
    10 Aug 2014, 04:19 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, For me it's not IF but how much of a threat the Ultrabattery is. For certain apps not so much but we cannot discount the fact that they are attracting attention which I'm sure we can agree Axion needs desperately. They got the New Mexico and Pennsylvania storage apps. They got the Honda Odyssey for Japan and are being tested as one option on A Kia application. So there is little doubt, given where we are standing, the Ultrabattery is a big thorn in Axion's ass.
    10 Aug 2014, 04:42 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Did we actually see a Honda Odyssey with an UB tested by an OEM? I had wondered if that was a typo, because previously the UB had been tested by ALABC using a Honda Insight or Civic?

     

    I have to admit I've been busier lately so I may be getting facts mixed up.

     

    Still, if it wasn't an OEM testing the UB in a car, that means the UB isn't that far along either. The Kia option wasn't necessarily Kia's design either. It was a supercharger design promoted by ALABC - who wanted the PbC as first choice!

     

    So who knows if the UB is really being considered there too.
    10 Aug 2014, 04:51 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Ranma, All articles that support what I stated were posted in this form. That the UB is being tested by Kia we should have little doubt based on the discussed evidence. But it is just in testing. The article I posted stating the UB was being used on the Honda Odyssey IMO could be called into question as it was written by at least one member with strong ALABC affiliation. The article was an excerpt from a book. So I do think it fair to suggest looking for further supporting evidence on this point which shouldn't be too hard to find if in fact the vehicle with the UB is in production.
    10 Aug 2014, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    ii and Rick,
    Yep the charge acceptance. I had heard of the discharge curve of course, but I figured by converting to AC the inverter could provide voltage regulation to 110v no sweat. As DI states below running 4 16v batteries should make it doable. The only thing that I saw that would need to be figured out would be starting the engine automatically for a recharge cycle and then shut off again, something I didn't see as being that complicated.

     

    I am a garage and old farm boy tinkerer and didn't think it would be hard to figure out. After hanging out around here and watching auto and trains for a few years, well, now I know better.
    11 Aug 2014, 04:05 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    Hi JP,
    I understand the opportunity costs of focusing on a small market vs a larger market that would have quicker pay back for the R&D needed to make a system work. I was originally hoping to put a system together in my garage (why I was searching for a battery to begin with).

     

    All water under the bridge at this point as I found the batteries were unavailable to the common tinkerer. The best I could do was buy some stock for my sock drawer and hope my time would come to tinker in the garage.
    11 Aug 2014, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • Noahfreak
    , contributor
    Comments (41) | Send Message
     
    I too would be interested in tinkering. I've often wondered if Axion is missing out on a huge at-home-hobbyist market by failing to offer their batteries directly to the consumer market. It would be easy enough for them to set something up through Amazon or eBay. It would also make public proof-of-concept for free through media like YouTube and Facebook as people cobble stuff together successfully using PbC and display their results. Plus, I'd just like to build a stop-start system for my gas-guzzling pickup truck that would cook a LAB pretty quick ;).
    13 Aug 2014, 04:57 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    Imagine what it could do for the family car S/S market in Europe if the class 8 sized trucks in Europe were to begin appearing on the roadways with a S/S system that actually was of merchantable quality, that being that it was fit for the purposes for which it was intended?

     

    It would be reasonable to expect all the current owners of S/S equipped cars that work only on a sporadic and unreliable basis to ask: if they can do this for the big rigs, then why on earth can't they do it for the family car? Many a service advisor at the dealerships for BMW, Mini, Ford C-Max, et al, will be dreading this very question from their customers as they charge them over 150 Euros to recharge their failed SLI battery on their car.
    10 Aug 2014, 03:47 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    User 39, The same can be said for Toyota, Nissan, Ford and Dodge full sized trucks with Cummins engines given your thought process.

     

    BTW, From reading the forums the replacement costs for the batteries in these applications are far higher than the 150 Euros on average. This is because most of the aftermarket suppliers cannot reset the BMS so the customers are being forced to go to the dealerships to reset the system to a new battery. Nice little bit of customer disrespect going on with this system.

     

    For example many like this.

     

    http://bit.ly/ValPP9
    10 Aug 2014, 04:03 PM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    -->> iindelco,

     

    Regarding Ford, Dodge w/Cummins, et al, yup, the same would apply. The reference to the service fee of 150 Euros was what posters on the relevant forums were saying they were having to pay was not for a battery replacement and computer reset, that is what they are having to pay just to get the dealerships to do a simple battery re-charge. Replacing the battery and doing the required computer reset would be much higher.

     

    Our local Cummins dealer was mentioning Cummins collaberating with Nissan with the aim of bringing out a Nissan Titan? with a red engine block under the hood.

     

    I can't remember exactly where I had heard or read that Cummins has cancelled the natural gas operational engine program. They had some of their shops already setup to do the maintenance and repairs for those systems and had the techs all trained up and ready to do the work. IIRC, complexities in the system and a lack of foreseeable consumer uptake were the deciding factors in the cancellation.

     

    BTW, I just downloaded the 48 volt info, and the BMW paper "48 volt – its threats and opportunites", mentions the increasing electrical load requirements of the BMW 7 Series. Since the 7 Series vehicles are the technological showcase for the BMW line-up of vehicles, this adds more to the idea that the auto makers are really serious about a move to 48 volts. BMW will want to continue using the 7 Series for its showcase purposes, and to do so, they are saying that higher voltages will be required if the auto companies want to keep working at the leading edge of tech for auto.

     

    That web site is a great resource, by the way.
    10 Aug 2014, 05:13 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    User 39, Thanks for the clarification on the costs/services on the SS system. Pretty pricey when you think about the fuel being saved vs how lacing the system is in the robust system category and temperamental it is to various conditions.

     

    Don't know how or if it relates but Honda canceled its home charging station sales for natural gas powered vehicles. IIRC the stated reason was variations in the quality of the natural gas supply.
    10 Aug 2014, 05:42 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I've just posted a new Instablog with a moderately edited version of Jay Bowman's most recent update.

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    10 Aug 2014, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Forgot to mention: AXPW may have saved my life last week. As the stoplight turned green, I wanted to get my phone out of my pocket so I could check on AXPW. It was hard to get my phone out (put on a few pounds lately) so there were a good 2-3 seconds while the light was green before I went forward. Right then a car blasted through his red light at 40-50 mph and narrowly T-boned me.

     

    If AXPW hadn't had its fall in price lately, maybe things would have turned out differently then. Of course, now that my life has been spared, it should be free to go back up :)

     

    When people lose on their investments, they might say "at least I still have my health." This was a stunning example of that.
    10 Aug 2014, 08:59 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    "Forgot to mention: AXPW may have saved my life last week."

     

    Ranma, Shhh, we're in a quiet period. Can't be releasing good news before a cap raise. I'd hate like hell to get more man hole covers for paper promises.
    11 Aug 2014, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    It's easy to make fun of quiet periods, but they're the scariest things in the world for securities lawyers.

     

    If a company says too much during the period prior to the filing of a registration statement, the SEC can decide that the public statements constitute "gun jumping" and impose a 30 to 90 day timeout. For a company like Axion that needs a relatively quick cash infusion – a lengthy timeout is incredibly costly.

     

    Once a registration statement has been filed with the SEC, almost everything the company says between the filing date and the effective date has to be "prospectus quality" disclosure. Once a deal has been sold and closed PR can return to a normal course of business dynamic, but until then the lawyers have everybody walking on egg shells.
    11 Aug 2014, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Under my microscope, I can't see the difference between Axion's "quiet period" and their NDA normal marketing presence. Keeps everybody guessing...
    11 Aug 2014, 10:05 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    Took the words right off my keyboard.
    11 Aug 2014, 10:06 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    JP, this quiet period ruse is a joke. AXPW's been a quiet period for years. it's nothing new. I agree with RK

     

    No cc and a letter that you can't ask questions and get answers from is also pitiful.

     

    So everyone knows where I stand:

     

    -DDG was brought in 6 months ago to do exactly what he's doing now, clean up the last financing mess and the accounting books
    -Obtain new financing
    -Increase revenues whether it's profitable or not, and I can bet you the price of PBC comes down to get deals done.
    -IF, AXPW doesn't hit the grand slam TG dreamed of and near bankrupted the company...then DDG sells it just like the other companies he took over.
    -I want no part of this RS
    11 Aug 2014, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    The PbC is priced too low as it is, IMO. That's what they get for comparing it to storage devices that can't do what it can. Perhaps we should start comparing it to supercaps on the basis of capacitance cycling. What's the going rate for a supercap moving 100s of amps?

     

    Unfortunately there's no simple means that I know of for collaborating on a document that not only collects all the varied bits of data about the PbC, but also about its place in the spectrum of energy/power storage devices. That would help in any discussion about competition, "fair" pricing and so on. To put together such a document properly - I tried and failed early this year while reviewing the Lyon Station UBER-installation - is quite a project, especially with such limited data so widely strewn.
    11 Aug 2014, 10:28 AM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    @LT: Even though you've disturbed many Axionista "rose colored" scenarios with your comments over the last several months, I can't say I disagree with your assessment above.

     

    Add to that we likely have a fairly recent director that aggressively spread FUD in these concentrators, and it becomes very difficult to delineate the "good guys" from the "bad guys." Frankly, I no longer believe anyone anymore.

     

    But politics aside: I watched the price action today. A sub-10c close puts the company at what, 22 Million dollars? What are the patents or IP actually worth? What is the PPE worth? What kind of discount will the new shares be offered at? What will be the markets reaction?

     

    It's quite easy to have dry-power with a sub-10c stock, but I have no visibility as to what shenanigans are going on in New Castle (or not going on).

     

    My gut told me a while ago that the faithful Axionista crowd would be the sacrificial lambs until the product takes off. Thus far, that has been the case.
    11 Aug 2014, 06:03 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    Oh... one final question: Has E.Penn already ripped off Axion's patents.... again... who do you trust?
    11 Aug 2014, 06:06 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "aggressively spread FUD in these concentrators,"

     

    Speaking of FUD.
    11 Aug 2014, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    @ D-inv: That's a fair critique of my post.

     

    As I recall, you have also asked many questions and delivered many critiques in your numerous postings.

     

    My instincts tell me now would be a good time to lower my cost basis. These recent "identity shennanigas" concerning Yoda have shaken my faith, somewhat. My recent posting have everything to do with getting feedback from people like you, and others. Even if I'm attacked in the process.
    11 Aug 2014, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Essentially, Yoda and others like Ed Buiel had the same critique of management - poor salesmanship, marketing, and secrecy. Many board members like Rick Krementz shared that view.

     

    I had posted that I didn't share that view, and maybe I was wrong, maybe not. However, I think it's also moot to debate that now, because 1) the stock price has fallen to reflect performance 2) new management era.

     

    With various programs falling into place, and no other advanced LAB taking the PbC's place, I still think AXPW is a great bet, especially at these prices. Let the whale hunt begin!
    11 Aug 2014, 07:07 PM Reply Like
  • Occam's_Razor
    , contributor
    Comments (2301) | Send Message
     
    @Ranma: No doubt Dr. Buiel, Yoda, and others have been singing the same tune with respect to their critique of management. There has been strong voices against those critiques. I do not know who to listen to anymore nor who is the "good guy."

     

    There's a Guns and Roses song: "Welcome to the Jungle"... There are several lines in the lyrics of that song that reflect Axion's story dating back to Mega-C.

     

    Here, see for yourself... with lyrics: ;-)

     

    http://bit.ly/Ve4vst

     

    You know where you are? You in the Jungle, baby!
    11 Aug 2014, 09:58 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "It was hard to get my phone out (put on a few pounds lately) so there were a good 2-3 seconds while the light was green before I went forward. Right then a car blasted through his red light at 40-50 mph and ...."

     

    Congrats on outcome of the delay. :-) And survival of the subsequent adrenalin 'rush'!
    10 Aug 2014, 11:49 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    This is probably the system GE is working with NS on:

     

    GE Announces First Data Lake Approach for Industrial Internet to Better Access, Analyze and Store Industrial-Strength Big Data
    http://bit.ly/1ooFs2F
    11 Aug 2014, 05:00 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Just started reading the S-1, so I'm well behind you guys. So far, the two most interesting things to me are:

     

    1) 1 registered warrant for each share. I'm speculating here, but that would help explain TG's comment about "only 10% discount", as the warrants have some value. Speaking of that, what have you guys calculated that might be, using a couple reasonable scenarios? E.g., .085 for the stk and .01 for the warrant = .095 total. The massive warrant issuance also helps explain, in part, mgmt holding on to the massively high authorized share number. Finally, the warrants will be registered, which might give a chance for high-risk/reward investors, of which we seem to have many here of course, to swap stk for warrants. Or call Maxim and get in on the deal.

     

    2) Maxim Group is the book mgr, despite TG's apparent unhappiness about the PIPE. File that under 'you do what you gotta do.'
    11 Aug 2014, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • abcd9876
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    Agree with #1 - Thanks to warrants, final pricing might be 9-9.5 cents as warrants - depending on the expiry - could be worth 2-4 cents given recent volatility. While I am not a fan of warrants per se, it does alleviate need for another financing if stock performs well enough, they shall covert. Big question - has anyone on this board tried to subscribe to this issue - either via their brokerage or directly to maxim? Curious about how easy/difficult that would be as my guess is deal is already fully subscribed based on Indications of interest before S-1 got filed.
    11 Aug 2014, 10:41 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    abcd, the S-1 says the warrants expire in 60 months. We don't yet know the exercise price (and the number of warrants). If anyone has run some warrant pricing model scenarios, that would be interesting to know what they produced for the warrant value. Maybe a good place to start would be using exercise prices of 8.5 cents, 13 cents and 19 cents. 4 cents for the warrants seems high, I'm guessing.

     

    Another initial take-away from the deal is, with the large number of shares and share equivalents to be o/s, narrow range-bound trading seems likely in my view, until the company finally delivers some solid big-time commercial acceptance. Big supply awaits if the price goes up much. E.g., 11 cents/shr might be a 25% return on the stk alone, and 13 cents/shr, 50%, which will be awfully tempting to a lot of investors to sell down. And breaking thru 19 cents is gonna take a sea-change, looks like. Hope DG can deliver, eventually. Maybe in 2015, as Bob Averill seems to be suggesting.

     

    Funny, I used to invest in these kinds of deals years ago---a unit of 1 share and 1 warrant for a tiny company with big hopes. When the stk went up much, I sold the shares and hung on to the warrants. IOW, it was mostly about the warrants, to hit the homer. It usually took big news, a hot sector and increasing analyst coverage.
    11 Aug 2014, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • abcd9876
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    60 months feels like unusually long period. Bloomberg warrant calculator at 0.095 stock price and 0.13 striker price with 5 year expiry period gives me 0.05. 0.06 for strike 0.095 and 0.04 for striker 0.19.
    11 Aug 2014, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    abcd, wow, thx. So, if the unit pricing is, say, 9.5 cents, the stk portion might only be, say, 5.5 cents. Am I missing something? Maybe the unit will be priced at, say, 12.5 cents, in order to acct for the high warrant value. If not, oh boy, wacky mkt adjustments might happen. Using the max 1:50 RS ratio, Axion needs 6 cents/shr bare minimum to get a NASDAQ listing at $3/shr, so I'm thinking the unit price will be such that the stk portion is "safely" above that. So maybe 8.5 cents for the shrs + 3.5 for the warrants (approx 10% discount to 4 cents, but not sure what tax implications that has) = 12 cents total.

     

    I know it's ancient history, but the promising high risk/reward tiny-company unit deals I used to invest in typically had 5 yr warrants.
    11 Aug 2014, 12:14 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Mr. I, why would a unit price be 9.5 cents when the stock price is at that level (and currently higher)? Giving warrants is giving up a concession already... why give up a discount to market for the stock also?

     

    What was the PLUG deal like when it was still 12 cents?
    11 Aug 2014, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • abcd9876
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    10% discount talked about can be ignored as it might have gone the same way as 'significant sales in next month or so'. I would guess 30-40% discount, so final issue price might be 9.5 cents as JP speculated few days back for the combined unit. My hope is for warrant strike price to be 0.19 - which would make discount a bit more tolerable and also higher strike price ensures more cash as/when warrants are exercised.
    11 Aug 2014, 12:29 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    abcd, any stk portion price under 6 cents, or probably even close to it, has gotta be a non-starter I would think. A fundamental part of the whole package is an uplisting to NASDAQ, which will take at least 6 cents at the time of the listing determination.

     

    Maybe accy and tax rules allow some wiggle room in the valuation of the warrant portion, but I'm guessing everyone will follow generally accepted warrant pricing models.

     

    Ranma, I'm just reasonably speculating on how this might shake out. I would not at all be surprised that the "10% discount" mentioned by TG has changed considerably given the cooled sector and recent awful AXPW stk price behavior. On the other hand, 1:1 5-yr listed warrants with a low-enough exercise price may be enough kicker to keep the discount low. Certainly can't hurt. Looks like a lot of warrant value there---that's really what's prob making this deal work.
    11 Aug 2014, 12:40 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Mr. I, I think if your scenario plays out, TG and DDG deserve a kick in the pants. So much for fundamental valuation and minimal discount to market. A recent tank in share price should not be an excuse to lower the deal price further, when it's the prospect of the deal itself that lowered the price!

     

    As PcB Believer said, negotiations were going on while the stock was .14 to .16. Selling for 6 cents plus warrants would be a massive failure. In that case, I'd rather the whole shebang go to Bob Averill. Shareholders might make it out better by putting everything up for sale rather than a massive dilution.

     

    At this point in time, let's limit the doomsday conjectures as our stock price may still be determining the ultimate deal price.
    11 Aug 2014, 01:20 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Ranma, I don't have a scenario. I am simply thinking this thru. Maybe you guys already have, in which case I'd love to know what you're thinking and why. Or if someone has spoken to Maxim or any of the other underwriters, if any, and is able and willing to say what the price talk is, either privately or via PM'ing, great. Thx in advance.

     

    My emphasis so far is to point out that the warrant portion of the deal looks like a biggie---unless the exercise price is really high, much more important than, say, the PIPE warrants were, and as far as I can tell, any of the other deals over the last 6 yrs. 1 for 1, liquid (registered and listed and I think, tradeable immediately) and with a long life, might be worth a heckuva lot. As much as 1/4 - 1/3 of the total deal value, it looks like, is my early guess.
    11 Aug 2014, 01:29 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Ranma> I've spent three decades representing small companies in connection with their stock offerings. In that time I've assembled reams of data to support my client's arguments that the market price of their stock doesn't represent a full fair value. Despite my brilliant eloquence, I've never closed a deal with an investor who was willing to pay a premium to the market.

     

    Existing stockholders always think they're being prudent when they step away from the market in anticipation of an upcoming financing. What they're really doing is giving the new money a negotiating hammer. It's not fair, but it is life in the big city.
    11 Aug 2014, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    We shoot ourselves in the foot then complain about the pain. Over and over.
    11 Aug 2014, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "My emphasis so far is to point out that the warrant portion of the deal looks like a biggie---unless the exercise price is really high, much more important than, say, the PIPE warrants were, and as far as I can tell, any of the other deals over the last 6 yrs. 1 for 1, liquid (registered and listed and I think, tradeable immediately) and with a long life, might be worth a heckuva lot."

     

    Parallels my own thinking, Mr I. Have asked Scottrade (my usual broker; no investment banking) to explore purchase of units of the offering from Maxim Group for interested account holders. Direct contact of Maxim re- unit purchases depends on feedback.
    11 Aug 2014, 02:37 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Thx, D-inv. Would like to get an update on what u find out, if that's ok.
    11 Aug 2014, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • abcd9876
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    Thanks D-Inv. No luck with Fidelity, they are not involved and seems they would not facilitate any orders to Maxim via their own accounts. I am a bit reluctant to go to Maxim directly given the trouble of setting up a new account with them but maybe that's the only option.
    11 Aug 2014, 04:53 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    Mr.I and interested others -- Scottrade's response was as expected. Will not be able to purchase units at offering through them. Have a call into Maxim Group (& purchase bids on existing shares through Scottrade).
    13 Aug 2014, 03:39 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Thx, D-inv.

     

    I would b surprised if any discount broker was allowed in the group for Axion's deal, but I could be wrong. Too obscure and small of a deal, and no chance of analyst coverage, future I-bank fees, etc. Wrong side of the deal tracks, essentially.

     

    You did well by going straight to Maxim, IMO, but I'll be surprised if they let a new acct get some of the deal, unless we're talking a big $ amt. or you know somebody or the deal is going badly.

     

    I didn't read much of the S-1, but wouldn't it be nice if the stk finally gets some post-deal support from the deal broker? Agented deals blow, in that regard.
    13 Aug 2014, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    The S-1 stated that Maxim may do market maker support for the deal. What do you think will happen with that?
    13 Aug 2014, 08:29 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Underwriters usually provide significant support for their own deals because they live or die by the success or failure of the deal they underwrite. If their clients make money, they'll be lined up to participate in the next deal. If their clients lose money, the may hold back on future deals or even move their accounts in search of greener pastures.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:31 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    John - How bad could the next bloodbath be in order for Maxim to get their clients another good deal?
    13 Aug 2014, 09:33 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I've already made a $0.095 guess at the offering price. There are plenty of prophets of doom in these parts who are happy to predict Armageddon. I won't play that game.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:37 PM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (493) | Send Message
     
    Stefan :: I realize its been a long hard road in this stock, but I think what John meant is that the underwriter works to make sure its a solid company with good prospects. Also, they work to make sure there is a market for the stock as the company grows.

     

    Getting as low a price as possible for their investors probably also plays a role, but company prospects are much more important.

     

    If VCs were investing in this company instead of us, one thing they would look for (besides all the obvious stuff) is that the company would be able to raise enough money, and would ask for enough money, to reach cash-flow positive operations prior to running out of money. In the VC business, they call that "runway". As in "Are you going to take flight before getting to the end of the runway?" I imagine underwriters consider that a factor too.
    14 Aug 2014, 11:13 AM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    JBB,

     

    IMO - The underwriter works to make sure that it's investors get a good enough deal to make money no matter what happens to the underlying company. That is the difference between a financier or a strategic investor/partner.

     

    Maxim was the underwriter last time and is again this time. Let's hope upon a star that they find some different people and some more equitable contract terms.

     

    We are not talking VCs here. But since we potentially have the ear of one the Gates' fund managers, maybe they should be approached.

     

    I hear he likes investing in battery companies based near Pittsburgh ...

     

    http://bloom.bg/12gLCTP
    14 Aug 2014, 02:44 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Stefan - Aquion is the opposite of Axion: very slow discharge and recharge rates.

     

    I always thought it was a shame the two companies don't work together. The guy I talked with at Aquion was aware of Axion, but there was no joint effort as far as I could make out.

     

    Unlike Axion, they promptly sent out spec sheets, dealer contact info, some pricing, and later followed up. I guess there are about as many Aquion batteries in the wild as Axion.

     

    ("Wild" including ePower, Bysolar, 999, etc.)
    14 Aug 2014, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    "Unlike Axion, they promptly sent out spec sheets, dealer contact info, some pricing, and later followed up. I guess there are about as many Aquion batteries in the wild as Axion."

     

    RK - That is wild and crazy talk. IMO, blunt honesty about your battery's capabilities could be a competitive advantage.
    14 Aug 2014, 03:12 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    This financing for Cytomedix was an interesting situation.

     

    The closing price on March 31, 2014 was .50 when the first tranche was announced and the fixed conversion price was .52. Since then the stock has been much lower and the second tranche was announced on July 26, 2014 when the price was .41 and the conversion price is still .52.

     

    http://bit.ly/1mD9J8i
    11 Aug 2014, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    This looks like something that Axion should be involved in.
    No Longer Just Growth: Investing in Renewable Energies for Yield
    http://bit.ly/1mDbEtz
    11 Aug 2014, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • Josh Greene
    , contributor
    Comments (78) | Send Message
     
    So, doing some very back of the envelope math:

     

    If you own 1% of the company at 2.5M shares at 10 cents, at a 25M market cap.

     

    A raise of 15M at 10c share, adds 150M shares to the float
    Now, there are 400M shares.

     

    50:1 reverse split.
    Now a 40M market cap company, 8M shares at $5/per, and you now own .00625% of the company.

     

    The big question is, for the funders, would you put up 15M for 37.5% of the company? When, theoretically, you could buy the same amount in the market for about 8-9M currently?
    11 Aug 2014, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Quibble: it's .625%.

     

    The funders should put up 15M because a 40M market cap company with 15M in cash is stronger than a 25M market cap company with no cash.

     

    Legacy shareholders own the same size of pie, just a smaller slice of a bigger pie. Assuming no discount.
    11 Aug 2014, 02:34 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    Josh> Here in is my disappointment in the unfortunate circumstances: "The big question is, for the funders, would you put up 15M for 37.5% of the company? When, theoretically, you could buy the same amount in the market for about 8-9M currently". This is absolutely false. You cannot buy 37.5% of the company for $8-9 Million. This is because I have a high suspicion that if that much buying pressure came into the market, price would be stable somewhere north of 30 cents.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    The advantage to the high rollers is that they can guarantee that the company would receive a certain number of millions of dollars for a certain price, which JP believes is about $0.095 per share. The company gets its operating cash, buying time to win commercial success and the ensuing investor demand. Unfortunately, there isn't enough retail demand to give the company the confidence it needs to raise the cash it needs from the public. That being said, if you intend to invest >$1M and want to pay your lawyer a few tens of thousands, you can probably get in on the deal.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:10 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    My only consolation is that no news is definitely not bad news while a company has been in a quiet period. The investors who are providing the capital may be just as pleasantly surprised as us that the company already made a win.

     

    I am also encouraged by the intent to use $2M for capex. This suggests that some aspect of the business strategy has materialized.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:13 PM Reply Like
  • Josh Greene
    , contributor
    Comments (78) | Send Message
     
    Patrick, I agree with you, in that you couldn't invest 10M in the market now, without driving the price up - but you definitely could put in a million or two - but at this point, knowing you could get warrants, you'd probably hold off. So, I do wonder if some of the folks who currently hold 1M+ share positions are waiting to see the terms of the deal, and contemplating investing that way.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    I think the key players have already come to an agreement. That being said, I have no idea how these things work, and I suspect this will not yet be effective until after the quarterly report.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5783) | Send Message
     
    PY, IMO, you are correct that the deal is already cut. We won't know until after the fact.

     

    As to your earlier post about owning 1% of the company, etc. And someone buying Millions of $$ worth of stock driving the price up in order to get 37% of the company....you really won't have to make that decision as the BOD will make that move for you.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    Additionally, I think after the recent fall in price, the financing deal is already very well baked into the stock price. Ideally, legacy holders would have supported the stock price at higher levels, thus proving the demand required to finance the company with less dilution on your original investment. Thankfully, I pulled out all the stops in Dec-Jan and have a cost basis of $0.12. Anything between $0.07 and $0.20 is completely immaterial to me. Worst case scenario, the tangible assets are worth $0.03. That's only a 75% decline, not 100%. Upside: multiples of $1. I would vote yes if next year GE wanted to buy us for ~$1 billion.
    11 Aug 2014, 03:32 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Patrick,
    So, after additional shares are issued and present shares are reversed and a potential pop for being Nasdaq listed - what multiple or "multi-bagger" potential would you expect from a GE (or another giant) bid for $1 billion? Parameters for such figuring are wide.
    I've thought such a bid might occur at some point but never put a price on it. GE was the first to come to mind, too. Any guesses?
    My other scenario is once things catch on for Axion market the the Axion brand and add a sizable LAB and, perhaps, other battery business around it, too. Its easy to imagine a workable marketing program.
    OTOH, If Axion mainly sells its specialty terminals products to other manufacturers will they still be labeled as Axion batteries? Growth will occur but where might the expansion occur?
    11 Aug 2014, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    If the BoD sells all the newly authorized shares (about 95 million), even a billion dollars is not very exciting to legacy shareholders, assuming a 50:1 RS.

     

    The legacy holders, owning about 5% of the company, would get 5% of the purchase, ie, $50m. Current market cap is less than $25m, so at best that is a two bagger for those who bought sub-10 cents. For others with a higher cost, blech.

     

    Of course, the BoD may not sell all the authorized shares. Then again, GE may offer less than a billion, or nothing at all.
    11 Aug 2014, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • isthisonebetter
    , contributor
    Comments (385) | Send Message
     
    Rick,

     

    Axion isn't issuing 95 million post-split shares, are they? I don't think that math works out, unless I'm misunderstanding your post.
    11 Aug 2014, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    I think he's saying if Axion limps year to year without sales, causing Axion to dilute to all its authorized shares (100m).

     

    After the RS Axion will have 5m shares issued, with possibly an additional 2m shares + 2m warrants (100m shares at .10 for $10m, pre-50:1 RS).

     

    So at 7m shares + 2m warrants, we're still a far cry from issuing all 100m.
    11 Aug 2014, 10:09 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    The shareholders authorized 100 million shares, post-RS, which equals 5 billion pre-RS shares. Post-RS, the issued shares will be slightly less than 5 million shares.

     

    Therefore, the Board could issue another 95 million shares. The present S-1 does not issue anywhere near 95m. Nobody knows what the next S-1 will have.

     

    My comment above was a hypothetical $1b offer from GE, and had nothing to do with this year's financing. Even if GE does make a $1b offer, the Board may issue much less than 95m shares and consequently reward legacy shareholders, including themselves.
    11 Aug 2014, 10:24 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Don't recall if this was posted.

     

    New Jersey Launches $200M Energy Resilience Bank for Microgrids and Distributed Generation

     

    http://bit.ly/1mDqYX9
    11 Aug 2014, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    Until the RS executes I don't do math with it in mind. If the PbC battery is proved in the marketplace, AXPW would sell for between $1 and $2 with 500 million shares outstanding.

     

    If I am wrong, AXPW is worth nothing at all. If I am right, the market may get ahead of itself, greedy, overbought, etc. Then we might be looking at $4-5 with 500 million shares outstanding.
    11 Aug 2014, 11:23 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19491) | Send Message
     
    08/11/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up now).
    # Trds: 52, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 85000, Vol: 498964, AvTrSz: 9595
    Min. Pr: 0.0955, Max Pr: 0.1069, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1010
    # Buys, Shares: 12 115000, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.0999
    # Sells, Shares: 40 383964, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1013
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:3.34 (23.05% "buys"), DlyShts 5617 (01.13%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 1.46%

     

    We had one egregious outlier today – a “fishing lure”? It was a 100 share buy at $0.169. The next lower price was ...

     

    On the traditional TA front, volume improved again, finally getting into what I would think useful, near 500K.

     

    I had mentioned we had moved below my short-term descending support and then started moving up and that line would become support. I hoped not as it's descending quite rapidly – I wanted to see us break away from it. It cooperated today with both the third close above the line, currently ~$0.0915 AFAICT, and the low moved up and away today. Let's hope that continues.

     

    The oscillators I watch are all out of oversold today, except MFI. I thought all would get out of there when I said one more decent day should move several of them out of that condition. Some of them are barely out, but we'll take what we can get. With the improving volume, improving trading range and the oscillators improving I think we can at least look for no near-term push below $0.09.

     

    The Bollinger band extremes are still widely spread and in a decisive downward attitude. In the current price range the 50-day SMA is still tracking to cross below the 200-day SMA in just a few more days.

     

    Yesterday I took a stab and said I think some sideways consolidation for at least a few days is in the cards for now. Today looks positive for that to develop now that we've departed above that descending support line.

     

    I'm still mindful that we are exiting the period where we have seen some improvement in price and are entering the time when we get sags. Now is just a wait and see period.

     

    In the non-traditional areas ...

     

    This is the second day wherein buy percentage weakened. Today VWAP moved up nicely on decent volume rather than weakening as it did yesterday. Yesterday as both weakened I said no cause for alarm ...

     

    oday I am a bit concerned that the buy percentage dropped again. But it may be just that $0.10 range resistance coming into play as bids got into the high $0.09x and low $0.10x areas. At that range sellers could be expected to show up strongly.

     

    We didn't have as many 100K bids today – only NITE and ATDF had them. So we lost CDEL, CSTI and ETRF. On top of that, we've didn't see bids of more normal size from MMs that normally have not participated – we lost BKMM and VFIN.

     

    All combined, the $0.10 seems more likely to hold as stout resistance in the near-term.

     

    The low $0.09xx area is looking like stronger support when compared to the $0.10 area. The only thing missing was strong volume. But since 8/5, the second day with a low of $0.0851, we've had a trend of improving volume. In thousands beginning 8/5 we have: 731.66, 120.92, 260.11, 336.54 and ~498.964K.

     

    The usual is in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    12 Aug 2014, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Well, we'll see how things look "on the other side." ...post-RS etc. If things progress uninterrupted in any orderly fashion, even if things continue to move slowly, ePower looks more and more interesting.
    But was it "Big Red" I read here on the blog that had ordered and received a cache of batteries? This rumor is probably officially unverified but should this be a concern to ePower? Or would Cummins be working in concert with ePower in this regard?
    Just doing a little quiet period speculation.

     

    12 Aug 2014, 10:45 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Jay Bowman tried to get Big Red's attention for years without any luck. Last summer Axion arranged a meeting with Cummins at their test track that included a platoon of Cummins engineers who went over the ePower tractor with a fine tooth comb. Ever since, Cummins has been bending over backwards to support our work at ePower.

     

    In my experience a company like Axion can't facilitate an audience like the one ePower got with Cummins unless there's a solid pre-existing relationship. Since Axion has disclosed the existence of a "Stop/Start Initiative with a Diesel Engine Manufacturer" in its investor presentation, it's not much of a stretch to conclude (a) the unnamed diesel engine manufacturer is Cummins, and (b) the stop-start initiative was proceeding apace in the summer of 2013 when Axion brought Cummins and ePower together.

     

    A couple years ago Axion was working on APU applications for long haul trucking and in connection with discussions of the APU application Tom Granville casually mentioned that Axion had identified and was working on an even more attractive trucking application.

     

    When I connect the known data points and build a timeline, I feel comfortable speculating that Axion has been working with Cummins on a stop-start system for diesel engines for 18 to 24 months, if not longer. If that speculation is close to accurate, then it would be about time for Cummins to move the stop-start initiative from the laboratory to a test fleet.

     

    Given the support ePower gets from Cummins on a regular basis, I think they'd rather join us as a preferred vendor than compete with us.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:06 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Billion,

     

    Regardless of how closely Cummins and ePower are working together, I think Axion working with Cummins is a positive for both Axion and ePower. As JP has written, Cummins working with ePower is a big positive for ePower.

     

    From Cummins PoV, ePower creates additional demand for their engines, not less. If the ePower system is tuned specifically for certain Cummins engines, there is less opportunity for Cummins' competitors.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    The link will get even stronger if Cummins decides our drivetrain will be a good use for their permanent magnet generator that would give us 20% more power from our current engine.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (513) | Send Message
     
    John, I'm hearing you say that a nano-cap company told a Giga-cap company that there is a handful of guys in a garage who want to use their engine for something different. And they listened.
    12 Aug 2014, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    That's exactly what I'm telling you. They not only listened, they set a demonstration on their test track with a platoon of their engineers in attendance (in addition to Jay and a couple Axion executives).

     

    Of course I'm also telling you that the same nano-cap company has had disclosed relationships with BMW and Norfolk Southern since 2010 and filed a joint DOE grant application with General Motors LLC in 2011. The grant application didn't win, but that doesn't change the fact that GM took the supporting actor role on the marquee.

     

    http://bit.ly/1fAOoNb
    12 Aug 2014, 12:37 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Am I correct in recalling that TG indicated that this initiative would proceed with or without the grant win? Or was that another program?
    12 Aug 2014, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    There is a very good chance that there are test systems already on the road and the order is just an increase in sample size. Maybe converting the test configuration into a "standard" configuration and continuing to road test.

     

    Endurance testing takes time.
    12 Aug 2014, 02:07 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Iindy> ISTR that Tom said both the GM program and the subsequent SBIR program would go forward with or without DOE money.
    12 Aug 2014, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John, I thought that was the case.
    12 Aug 2014, 03:02 PM Reply Like
  • Fritz1969
    , contributor
    Comments (42) | Send Message
     
    It is astounding, that switching the generator can make such a big change.
    13 Aug 2014, 03:34 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    We are using a 240 hp engine that has enough power to run a 180 kW generator. The air cooled generator we're currently buying off the shelf can only do 150 kW and our big issue is space since the generator has to fit between the chassis rails.

     

    A 180 kW REPM generator will be roughly half the size and weight of our the cooled generator. So doing the upgrade will increase our maximum generator power by 20% in a suitable form factor. It's not about energy conversion efficiency because the generator we have does a good job of efficiently converting fuel to electricity. It's mainly an issue of getting the biggest benefit from the available real estate.
    13 Aug 2014, 07:48 AM Reply Like
  • KillaCycle
    , contributor
    Comments (636) | Send Message
     
    If you swap to a PM generator, how will your new digital voltage control fit into that sceme? How will you control the power factor with the PM generator?
    13 Aug 2014, 11:37 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    We both know that some questions are out of my technical depth. This is one of those issues that other team members will need to address in due course if Cummins decides they're willing to sell their REPM generator to us.
    13 Aug 2014, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    That would be a Stamford generator, I'd guess, John.

     

    http://bit.ly/1vIt951

     

    That's a link to the first edition of Cummins' "Generating Insight" publication, ca. 2012

     

    The opening by the Cummins' Global Techoncho is notable for the holograph in the second paragraph , for those interested in IP questions. As is page 3.

     

    For those interested in rare earths, check out page 11. The next generation "Cummins" generators include "green and friendly" units with none of those problematic rare earths. "The green electric motor will also feature new control system technology that will see conventional Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) inverters replaced by a “high temperature alternative.

     

    IMO, it's good reading throughout.
    13 Aug 2014, 01:29 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    I have made investment decisions based on various metrics including how my gut feels, but the single best one that has saved my ass from losing everything in the stock market is this one: Don't buy unless the company has little to no debt.

     

    As an example: Dendreon (NASDAQ:DNDN) looked like they had a pretty cool drug a few years back when it traded for north of $50. Today you can pick it up for $1.38 but why would you when the company, in its latest 10-Q, filed yesterday, noted that there is "a significant risk that...we will not be able to repay or refinance the 2016 Notes." The company is "considering alternatives...including alternatives that could result in leaving our current stockholders with little or no financial ownership of Dendreon."

     

    -Talk about burning legacy holders.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:34 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I've had a number of investments that didn't get me the 10- or 20-bagger I was hoping for but I've never taken a loss on a company that stayed debt free. I've also had six and seven digit losses on companies that borrowed more money than they could repay. I've reached a point in my life where I won't own a stock if the company has more debt than equity, or more debt than it can service from existing cash flow.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:57 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Butts and blunts. Smoking fast progress.

     

    Far Out! Hemp Could Power Better Super-Batteries

     

    http://nbcnews.to/1sOcJ5D
    12 Aug 2014, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    BEST FIND EVER! :)
    12 Aug 2014, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • Bylo-
    , contributor
    Comments (426) | Send Message
     
    Don't bogart that....
    http://bit.ly/1rsbsAd
    13 Aug 2014, 03:50 PM Reply Like
  • Amouna
    , contributor
    Comments (2001) | Send Message
     
    Very quiet day on the concentrator today. What's happening? :)
    12 Aug 2014, 02:13 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Everyone is under NDA today...Oops, I wasn't allowed to say that!
    12 Aug 2014, 03:02 PM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (513) | Send Message
     
    My broker made me sign an NDA before I bought the stock.</wisecrack>

     

    Hemp batteries runs into the same problem as corn ethanol. It uses a food source.
    12 Aug 2014, 04:11 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19491) | Send Message
     
    JohnM121: But that disadvantage is offset by a "high" DCA.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Aug 2014, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    In reference to my above posts, let me admit to being absent minded - the diesel start/stop relationship didn't occur to me. The potential of Axion, ePower, and Cummins getting closer does seem like a good thing.
    I look forward to the Axion CC (Hasn't the Axion CC been postponed?) and shareholders meeting.
    12 Aug 2014, 03:46 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Axion has a pending S-1 registration statement on file with the SEC. Until the deal is closed anything it says publicly including presentations, press releases and conference call transcripts will be classified as a free-writing prospectus under the Securities Act and the safe harbor provisions of the Exchange Act will offer less protection. Under those circumstances, particularly with a new CEO, I would advise a client to avoid conference call improvisation until the financing was completed and make all disclosures in writing. I've heard that they're shooting for a stockholders meeting in October, but that will be subject to change if the offering date gets pushed back.
    12 Aug 2014, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • john lowe
    , contributor
    Comments (17) | Send Message
     
    John,
    Does the prohibition you refer to carry over to Axion's customers? That is, would an announcement from
    Norfolk Southern still be a possibility?
    12 Aug 2014, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Material announcements must be made when material events occur. If, for example, Axion got a follow-on order from NS, the order would have to be promptly disclosed. Even with a registration statement on file, there's no problem with written documents that have been reviewed by counsel for both the company and the underwriters.

     

    What companies need to avoid are events like conference calls where a new executive's unscripted responses to off the wall questions from stockholders give rise to infinite possibilities for mistakes or inadequate disclosure.

     

    There's no way to know what Axion's lawyers will advise in this case, but I'd rather take the high and silent road until the deal was done.
    12 Aug 2014, 05:46 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    I would expect an announcement from NS would speak volumes by itself.
    12 Aug 2014, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (493) | Send Message
     
    John :: As I understand your comments, the time line going forward is probably:

     

    1) Axion will release a written 2nd quarter report.

     

    2) Several weeks in the future (up to 8-10?) Axion will announce a close of investment from a big investor.

     

    3) Axion will resume its regular Quarterly report/Conference call schedule after the deal is done.

     

    Any significant news along the way will be released in written form as an announcement.

     

    Its dumb of me to ask, I know, but is that about what I should expect?
    12 Aug 2014, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Axion must file its 10-Q by the end of this week. When the Form 10-Q is filed there will be an associated earnings release. If management decides to forego a conference call this quarter because of the pending registration statement, the earnings release will probably include more detailed information than we normally see.

     

    The timing of the public offering is uncertain because there's no way to know how long the SEC will take to process the filing. Frequently the SEC will decide that they don't need to review registration statements from companies that have been in the system for several years. If that happens, the financing could close within a couple weeks. If the SEC decides to do a full review of the registration statement the process could take a couple months. Since the timing of Axion's proxy filings for the reverse split suggest that the SEC did a proxy statement review, I think there's a good chance they'll forego a review of the registration statement (75% probability).

     

    Since the financing is being done as a public offering and the shares are being registered before the fact, the odds are very high that the offering will be bought by several investors instead of a single fund. SEC rues impose significant reporting obligations on anybody who owns more than 5% of a public company and onerous trading restrictions on anybody who owns more than 10%. Institutions avoid 10% ownership like the plague and generally prefer to keep their ownership under 5% because of the regulatory hassle. Since the registration statement is legally classified as a public offering, there's no reason that the shares couldn't be sold to several hundred investors, although that strikes me as unlikely given the size of the offering.

     

    If Axion foregoes a Q2 earnings call, it will go back to its established practice of holding regular earnings calls once the financing is done.
    12 Aug 2014, 09:20 PM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (493) | Send Message
     
    In my opinion, engineering is so much more fun than lawyer work. But I guess opinions will vary.....

     

    Also, humans do like to lie, cheat and steal - at least some of them, so the rules make sense.
    12 Aug 2014, 11:32 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    The neat thing about my practice is that every new client engagement forces me to learn enough about a different technology and industry to be able to fairly describe it to investors. I don't have to know enough to do the work, but I do have to know enough to explain the work. It's a great opportunity to keep learning.
    13 Aug 2014, 07:56 AM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2851) | Send Message
     
    JP - re 100's of investors v/s several; a repeat:

     

    John/Bob - dividing up $15 million over 100 investors ($150K each) is not much of an individual investment (risk) for bigger players; dividing 15 mil over 10 investors ($1.5 million each) begins to make for potential ouch decisions requiring more thought for that same ilk of investor. Especially, when they are more than likely being confronted daily with plenty of such opportunities (and then pick one, or not).

     

    At this point, the future moves we are waiting for are by the hungry funds jumping all over the $3-5 future wonder stock.

     

    Too bad that comes after the additional stock issuance, but hey, a win or two needs to be created somewhere to get the ball rolling, again. Hopefully, successfully.

     

    PS - How many additional shares could be added due to this offering, and what are the current numbers pre-rs??
    13 Aug 2014, 12:55 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    My best guess is that the underwriters are targeting a price in the $0.095 range, as adjusted for the reverse, with a 25% to 50% up on the warrants. This is only a guess based on pretty flimsy evidence. The recent S-1 talks about the PIPErs being locked up unless the market price is 2x the offering price and the recent 8-K talks about the PIPErs being locked up for any price under $0.19. When you put the two disclosures together and turn the crank, $0.095 comes out.
    13 Aug 2014, 01:05 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    The recent S-1 lockup is for the new investors right? Couldn't the PIPErs have negotiated themselves a lower barrier?
    13 Aug 2014, 01:18 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Lock-up agreements are always designed to protect new investors from legacy holders like the PIPErs who might want to sell more quickly than the market will support.

     

    The lock-up provisions are discussed on page 71 of the Form S-1 – http://1.usa.gov/1AeaKvW

     

    The disclosure needs to be tidied up a bit to conform to the 8-K but it currently says:

     

    "Lock-Up Agreements

     

    We and each of our officers, directors, and certain existing stockholders aggregating at least ___% of our outstanding shares, assuming the issuance of ______ shares to warrant holders in exchange for warrants, have agreed, subject to certain exceptions, not to offer, issue, sell, contract to sell, encumber, grant any option for the sale of or otherwise dispose of any shares of our common stock or other securities convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of our common stock for a period of 12 months after the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part without the prior written consent of Maxim Group LLC. The lock-up period may be reduced to six months, with respect to 50% of the shares subject to the lock-up, if after the six-month anniversary of the closing of the offering (i) the price per share of our common stock is trading at least two times the offering price of our common stock sold under this offering, and (ii) Maxim Group LLC grants a waiver, which waiver will not be unreasonably withheld.

     

    Maxim Group LLC may in its sole discretion and at any time without notice release some or all of the shares subject to lock-up agreements prior to the expiration of the lock-up period. When determining whether or not to release shares from the lock-up agreements, the representative will consider, among other factors, the security holder’s reasons for requesting the release, the number of shares for which the release is being requested and market conditions at the time."

     

    The basic rule is that the PIPErs can sell to their heart's content as long as the new investors are sitting on a double, but have to behave themselves if the new investors aren't sitting on at least a double.

     

    The thing that I find so encouraging about the language is that it suggests the new investors will hang around for a double rather than flipping for pennies.
    13 Aug 2014, 01:33 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    In his Instablog John posted:

     

    I've uploaded a copy of the Jun Gou dissertation to my Dropbox for those who would rather avoid a Google search.

     

    http://bit.ly/1vGSoVn

     

    Frankly a lot of the science is out of my depth but it does have an open circuit voltage vs state of charge graph for the PbC on Page 34 (page 53 of the PDF) and a ton of additional information on the PbC. FWIW it appears that references to the PbC are not generic and focus on our PbC®
    13 Aug 2014, 08:14 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19491) | Send Message
     
    08/12/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from the blog (up now).
    # Trds: 40, MinTrSz: 630, MaxTrSz: 25000, Vol: 223943, AvTrSz: 5599
    Min. Pr: 0.0900, Max Pr: 0.1097, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.0998
    # Buys, Shares: 13 70630, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1017
    # Sells, Shares: 27 153313, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.0989
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:2.17 (31.54% "buys"), DlyShts 34130 (15.24%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 22.26%

     

    Although it didn't look like it because of the bid and ask behavior, today was weak. Buyers were chasing the price up and the sellers were taking advantage as best they could and volume was low. Sellers were aided and abetted by 100K bids from ETRF, CSTI, CDEL and NITE. NITE could have been the ETRF bid, which I suspect was laid off to NITE as is common with ETRF. The ETRF bid was no longer visible, but it could have been masked by a 50K $0.098 bid from ETRF.

     

    We also saw normal bids from BKMM but not VFIN. CDEL moved their bid of 100K for $0.099 (11:41) to $0.102 at 15:22. A couple sells may have hit that bid totaling 6K shares.

     

    In spite of that, VWAP marginally weakened even as buy percentage rose from yesterday's 23% to 31.5% today.

     

    I'm wondering if this is the start of weakening seen in the middle weeks of the month.

     

    Donning my TFH, I can't help but wonder if these 100K bids that mostly seem to result in nothing but “show” are just tools to move price up. Combined with a $0.09 900 share sell at the open and the single buy of 5K at $0.1097, we've got a nice wide spread on the charts, setting the stage for MMs and others to make some money.

     

    All combined, the $0.10 resistance seems at risk in the near-term. This is mostly because I think traditional TA charts reflect the outliers and maybe some positive sentiment exists with the recent changes at Axion and the S-1 filing. But those outliers really bother me – my TFH keeps me worrying that we are being had.

     

    My non-traditional stuff doesn't support a push above $0.10 though. Smaller average trade size, lower volume, weakening newer inflection point calculation values, and daily short percentage having trouble returning to normal ranges all fail to support a strong push above $0.10.

     

    But in all cases low volume casts tons of doubt on any TA, including my non-traditional stuff. So I assign no high confidence to either the traditional or non-traditional results I see here.

     

    We have outliers at both ends of the spectrum today. At the low end was a single sell of 8K for $0.09, the low of the day. The next higher prices ...

     

    On the high end we saw a single buy of 5K shares for $0.1097. This was in the time-frame when bids were above $0.10 and the recent offers had been very briefly as high as $0.11. The next lower prices ...

     

    Daily short percentage continues to be choppy: 40%, 1.92%, 46.6%, 1.13% and 15.24% today. I've mentioned ...

     

    Today's low, high, VWAP, trade volume, and daily short sales moved -5.76%, 2.62%, -01.21%, -55.12% and 507.62% respectively. Price spread today was 21.89% VS. 11.94%, 10.28%, 3.96%, 8.77%, 17.51%, 29.26%, 14.36%, 5.84% and 8.70% on prior days.

     

    Using $0.0980 and $0.10 for the low and high ...

     

    The larger trades (>= 15K) occurred on 2 of the 40 trades, 5.00%. These 48,350 shares were 21.59% of day's volume, and traded at a VWAP of $0.0997. 1 of the larger trades, 50.00%, ...

     

    The other 38 trades, 95.00% of the day's trades, traded 175,593 shares, 78.41% of the days volume. The VWAP was $0.0998. 12 trades, 31.58%, were ...

     

    The usual stuff is in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    13 Aug 2014, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • raleigh731
    , contributor
    Comments (306) | Send Message
     
    I'm just surprised that the new information that the financing is basically done has not been received more positively. NSC, Cummins S/S speculation on batteries (possibly) shipped, PC sales still to come...I would have thought we'd be back in the .15 range, at least. With the possibility of more than that once fear of being left at the station sets in. The only thing I can think is that the fear of a (slight) price decline aafter the R/S.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:39 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Raleigh, A new CEO that hasn't shared a vision, an unknown financing and a prior CEO that has on the commercial side a "fails to deliver" record. I could go on but there is good reason for caution on Axion ownership.

     

    A ship with great bones sailing in a hurricane. All aboard!
    13 Aug 2014, 09:49 AM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Certainly there is potential energy being stored up. Like a tempest in a teapot!

     

    I had a dream this morning that I was at the computer doing other business, and all the sudden AXPW was shooting up =\
    13 Aug 2014, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    You forgot to mention that the ship is manned by a crew who all seem to be suffering to a greater or lesser degree from battered stockholder syndrome. I had hoped the healing would take less time once the daily beatings stopped, but I hoped the same thing for a variety of validation and testing activities, including ePower's.
    13 Aug 2014, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Raleigh - The financing is not "basically done", by any stretch. An S-1 is basically just an ad. It is like listing your house for sale, cleaned it up, got some pretty pictures, fixed stuff an inspector would find, found a broker, and set a price. No buyer has signed anything.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:02 AM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    More like it's potential buyers checking if the house is maintained and up to code, the title is free and clear of liens, and the bank checking if the house can back the loan. A lot closer to close than putting up an ad. Axion wouldn't have filed an S-1 without a deal near close. The final number of subscribers may change, but Maxim surely has a good idea of who's in on the deal.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    That's simply not true Rick. Public companies do not file Form S-1 registration statements for underwritten follow-on offerings unless the underwriters have a high degree of confidence that they can place the deal. IPOs get pulled from time to time because of adverse market conditions, but follow-on offerings almost always close because they're sold before the registration statement is filed.

     

    This is not like an IPO where the filing comes first and then the selling starts. Axion has been engaged in road show activities for several months in anticipation of an unregistered deal. This filing is merely an indication that demand among the investor group is high enough to justify a larger financing that can only be done with an advance registration.

     

    You are correct in saying that "no buyer has signed anything" because nobody can sign a binding contract until the registration statement clears the SEC. You can bet your bottom dollar, however, that the underwriter is already sitting on a stack of non-biding "indications of interest" for more shares than the registration statement includes.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:13 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3121) | Send Message
     
    Thank you, JP. I learned something and stand corrected.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:20 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    John, no doubt. I think TG's union negotiator skill set was perhaps great for an R&D company and to a large extent Axion's relationship with companies like NSC and the autos. On the flip side of the coin I think it hurt Axion immeasurably on the access to money side of the business and thus the syndrome you refer to. I had wished for some quick resolution to this with the new CEO but the timing for the transition relative to the latest cap raise didn't allow this. Very unfortunate IMO.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:23 AM Reply Like
  • Amouna
    , contributor
    Comments (2001) | Send Message
     
    JP,

     

    That we are suffering from the battered stock syndrome is a consequence of prior management performance. The market have TG the benefit of the doubt initially but when evidence started piling up that he was not the right caliber to take Axion forward, he should have taken the hint and stepped down. That was about 2 years ago. Today's stock price is merely a reflection of these prior accomplishments.

     

    Of course, the situation can change in the blink of an eye if a major customer steps up with a pbc order, but we have yet to see that.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:34 AM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (493) | Send Message
     
    raleigh :: What the market is saying is that Axion in its current form is worth $20Mil. When the investors sign - they will put up a bunch of money, and the value will then be $20Mil + "The Money". That will be at a higher share count, so the share price will be the same.

     

    The market is essentially valuing the company at the same price as what the new investors are valuing the company. That makes a certain amount of sense, as the new investors are probably well informed in order to take the plunge.

     

    Once recurring sales start to be predictable enough to show cash flow positive operations at some point, the market will value the company much higher. Until then we all have to wait.

     

    The non-linearity of the market was demonstrated to me when I bought Southwest Airlines 3 days before 9/11. I paid $14/sh for it. 3 years later, I sold it for the same $14. Last year I bought it again for $7. Then when it got to $11, I sold. Now its at $30, damn!

     

    My point is that the company was probably intrinsically worth $7 way back in 2000 when I paid $14, and rose linearly to $25 today. But the market doesn't track intrinsic value, it tracks some sort of equation like:

     

    (intrinsic value) * (risk factor) * (psychology factor)

     

    There is no way to predict the second two factors. All you can do is find good buy points and then wait for the market to catch up (or overshoot!) to reality.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Investment bankers and their clients are a funny lot with a strong herd mentality, which can make it tough when a company like Axion wants to stand out from the herd and do something entirely new, different and risky.

     

    From a financing perspective Axion had the worst of all worlds because going public was the only clear path to undisputed ownership of the PbC technology. So instead of doing all the development and validation work in a VC funded enterprise, the money had to come from the public equity markets.

     

    The preferred path would have been the one followed by Aquion and Ambri. They're years behind Axion in terms in terms of technical development and product validation, but they're carrying valuations that would have Axionistas popping corks when they got too tired to dance.

     

    The great fallacy is that $26 million is a reasonable value for a company that's spent 11 years and $100 million taking a technology from idea to product, and succeeded beyond its founders' wildest dreams. Now we're at that most critical stage where a bloodless heartless energy storage market gets to give the PbC a thumbs up or a thumbs down. In an ideal world Axion would have remained privately held until this stage was history. On the other hand, none of the Axionistas would have had an opportunity to play the game until the VCs were ready to take their profits and move on to the next deal.
    13 Aug 2014, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    John, re': "From a financing perspective Axion had the worst of all worlds because going public was the only clear path to undisputed ownership of the PbC technology."

     

    Can you expand on this? I don't understand how the two relate.
    13 Aug 2014, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • nym
    , contributor
    Comments (362) | Send Message
     
    "The great fallacy is that $26 million is a reasonable value for a company that's spent 11 years and $100 million taking a technology from idea to product...."

     

    Buyers shouldn't care how you got here, just what you have and what it might bring.
    13 Aug 2014, 11:32 AM Reply Like
  • Amouna
    , contributor
    Comments (2001) | Send Message
     
    In other words: the market is always right, even when it's wrong !
    13 Aug 2014, 11:56 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (3702) | Send Message
     
    Hi Amouna,
    I think what I hear from returning military vets fits. "it is what it is".
    13 Aug 2014, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Edmund> Before Axion was formed a group of less than scrupulous Canadian promoters got a partial license to the original technology from the Russian inventors. They turned around and raised a ton of money from widows and orphans before the Ontario Securities Commission cried foul and took away the punch bowl. Axion went public because it was the only way the founders could see to clear all of the conflicting partial claims to the technology and bring it all under one roof. While I don't want dredge up ancient and irrelevant history at this point, the Canadians really were like Max Bialystock on steroids.

     

    http://bit.ly/1Ae40hD
    13 Aug 2014, 12:52 PM Reply Like
  • nym
    , contributor
    Comments (362) | Send Message
     
    Amouna: There are those who have waited 11 years for the market to be wrong.
    13 Aug 2014, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (3951) | Send Message
     
    Sorry John, didn't mean to dredge that up - I was thinking something completely different.
    13 Aug 2014, 02:00 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2770) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, that was a great question. John explained it before, but I still don't understand/remember why going public settled any claims dispute.
    13 Aug 2014, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Nym> The market was doing OK until Q2-10 when a pair of bankruptcy trustees started pounding stock into the market without regard to their impact on the market and other stockholders. Since the there have been 9 big sellers who were solely responsible for the price carnage.

     

    Any time a "market" consists of 9 big sellers who don't care about price and thousands of buyers who do care, the efficient market theory becomes nonsense.

     

    We have no earthly idea what the market thinks Axion is worth because the market never had a chance to speak while the manipulators hogged the soap box.
    13 Aug 2014, 02:21 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4810) | Send Message
     
    "The market is essentially valuing the company at the same price as what the new investors are valuing the company."

     

    JBB, I believe "the market" is reflecting fear and uncertainty arising from a conspicuous asymmetric information situation. "The market" knows Axion runs out of money without a capital raise, that basic framework of a public offering capital raise have been agreed, and that investment banker(s) and Axion management have a good idea of what the share price will be while "the market" does not.

     

    Axion management is severely constrained in its communications with public investors and has been since announcement of the change in CEO/Chairman. DDG's appointment as CEO/Chairman was announced July 8 (TG resignation effective July 3 (a Sunday)). August 8, 30 days later, Axion filed its preliminary S-1 for $15 mil. capital raise through common stock + warrant unit offering. One might reasonably surmise the offering framework and probable price range was agreed by Axion management & Maxim Group on July 7 or 8 at which time AXPW shares closed at $.145 and $.14, respectively -- not the sub $.10 range seen more recently.

     

    One might also note Axion reached agreement August 1 to exchange AXPW common shares for 17,281,107 PIPER warrants at a 1.7:1 ratio when AXPW shares closed the prior day at $.1031. The exchange ratio and prior day closing price suggests Axion and PIPE investors valued those warrants (with exercise price of $.302) at ~$.175 at the time. One also might infer that Axion would not have negotiated such a swap without agreement (if not stipulated requirement) by the underwriter of the current offering.

     

    Why would Axion or its underwriter have any interest in extinguishing a large volume of warrants with an exercise price ~3x the prevailing market price. One possible reason that leaps to mind is Axion and its underwriter expect AXPW share price (adjusted for RS if and when it happens) to exceed that $.302 exercise price in short order and their continued existence constrained profit potential on shares and warrants about to be issued.

     

    Each of us forms our own opinions of risk/reward presented by Axion. For myself, TG's resignation from Axion employment signaled reduced risk and improved reward potential and I added shares to the small position I had retained. The preliminary offering S-1 filing outlined an offering that translated to me as further reduction in risk and greater potential reward. More purchases are under way through Scottrade presently. Awaiting a return call from Maxim Group re participation in the offering if and when it occurs.
    13 Aug 2014, 03:21 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    While it will come as no surprise to anybody who spent some time reviewing the PIPE notes, the PIPE warrants had a couple nasty provisions. The warrant agreement is here – http://1.usa.gov/1qUczxd

     

    Under Section 2(b) there was a relatively aggressive "full-ratchet anti-dilution provision" that adjusted the warrant exercise price down the new issue price in the event of a subsequent offering at less than the $.302 exercise price.

     

    The nasty hook was in Section 2(c) which provides that a downward reset in the exercise price will proportionally increase the number of warrant shares so that the PIPErs will retain the right to buy $5,218,894 worth of stock.
    13 Aug 2014, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2851) | Send Message
     
    James - your equation does not include "regulations" and that en