Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • Cramer's Mad Money - Which Stocks Are up 3,000%? (10/8/09)  [View article]
    I watched the interview with Dan Dimicco. The ,man said all the right generic things, but when Cramer pressed him for specific ideas he just repeated the generic stuff. Cramer was somewhat frustrated. If this is an indication of how Dimicco runs his company and leads his organization avoif the stock of Nucor. It is sure to fail.
    Oct 9, 2009. 10:42 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Announces List of Grant Recipients, Recognizing Significance of Hybrid Markets  [View article]
    John, I have enjoyed your various reports on battery technology. I understand that government funding is perhaps lowers the risk for private money, but now we have a situation where to a degree the government is picking winners and loosers in new technology development. When the government is the customer I can understand that, but when it simply subsidizes some and not others I wonder if this is going to kill innovation in the battery industry. Should I be worried or ..?
    Aug 6, 2009. 09:25 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Health Care Market Movers: SMMX, INSM, ADLS, HEB, ACUR and HALO  [View article]
    Watched the ABC infomercial last night produced by team Obama. It does look like a disaster in the making. The President delivered his talking points with charm and charisma. He did not do much by the way of actual math leaving over 300 Billion $ in balancing the cost with income, without even debating the accuracy or fairness of the game. He means well, he wants to do the right thing, but given that he is asserting we know how to actually reduce the cost of healthcare he does not lay out a specific plan that one can assess and evaluate. Given that this is a political gambit without specifics it is hard for me to see how one can plan investments, it is all a huge gamble
    Jun 25, 2009. 09:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kodak Options: The Picture Is Gloomy  [View article]
    I am loss to figure out how Kodak can make it. I have been in this position for the past few years. Kodak has done an excellent job in developing technically savy and high quality products at reasonable prices. But, there are many others who offer digital cameras, printers, etc. and there is no overwhelming competitive advantage. Brand loyalty has been non-existant for quite a while. It is hard to pull this dog out of the ditch. I can't understand why people keep paying/funding the huge losses over the years. Polaroid has already cratered a few years back. I looked at a senior executive position there about ten or so years ago and after a long weekend of going over the pros and cons I decided I could not in good conscience lead the organization that I did not see on a path to success. Someone else took the job and indeed lead it into the crater. It is perhaps time to take the good people at Kodak and free them from the misery, shut it down and move the talent to somewhere else so they can succeed.
    Jun 25, 2009. 09:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • GT Solar: Stock Price Reflects Concerns  [View article]
    My GT SOLAR shares trade at substantially lower price than this chart shows. Whatsup?
    May 7, 2009. 10:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Will Green Cars Make Detroit Profitable?  [View article]
    Don't under estimate the role tax credits can play in the car market. When tax credit is converted to tax grant, which some states are doing already it is a powerful driver. That is the approach that I believe the Obama administration plans to use to drive the market side of the equation. Choice is free, but the economic driver will unbalance the choice.
    May 4, 2009. 09:46 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • GM: Will a Two-Seat Segway Lead the Way?  [View article]
    Think PUMA for the streets of Bangkok, Hong Kong, and other crowded cities.
    Apr 8, 2009. 12:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Plug Power Puts Fuel Cells in Forklifts  [View article]
    Did you notice that PlugPower has a deal with QuestAir/ExxonMobil to commercialize an on-board reformer to make hydrogen from liquid fuels like gasoline, etc. eliminating the demand for H2 storage? This technology has legs left yet.
    Dec 15, 2008. 09:22 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Steve Chu, Energy Secretary: Greentech World Likely To Approve  [View article]
    Tom B, I like Chou for undersecretary of science and technology, but for Energy Secretary? Have you looked up the vita of the current Energy Secretary? Hardly a washed-up political crony. Someone who is an engineeer by training, has run a business, supported science and technology.
    Dec 11, 2008. 09:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Peak Oil's Bell Is Ringing  [View article]
    The problem in part is the definintion of oil used here. Conventional oil is what is likely to peak on the 2030 to 2050 time scale. A number of advanced technologies can be responsible for the timing. But unconventional oil is another resource that is not included here. First are tar sands, about the size of Saudi resource in Canada primarily, as well as Venezuela and elsewhere. Shale oil is a huge resource heavily in the western US, good for 50 to 100 years, beyond that coal can be converted to oil and oil products, technology already used by the Germans in WWII and the South Africans during the appartheid period. That technology has been improved tremendously and could be the source of oil based products for hundreds of years. The cost basis for these is probably in the $50 to $70/bbl oil equivalent basis. There are environmental issues that need to be addressed if one wants to use these resources, but that can and will be done. The major issue is AGW. The popular belief today is that this is 100% human sourced and thus fossil fuel based energy has to be replaced by alternatives. The politics of this is likely to govern any attempt to extend the fossil fuel era. If reality were to prevail, i.e. that Climate Change is mostly a natural phenomenon with some partical human contribution than different policy options may prevail and the impact on fossil fuels would be different. The underlying issue is how much capital investment can we afford to spend on energy related issues as a society vs. other priorities. We are talking about trillions of dollars over the next ten to twenty years. It is a major challenge.
    Nov 16, 2008. 10:16 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Shell Boosts Renewable Energy Spending: Will Big Oil Really Go Green?  [View article]
    This is pretty confusing story. Shell spending 1Billion $ to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over 5 years should not be included here since all oil companies, including ExxonMobil have been investing heavily (much more heavily than Shell) to improve their efficiency and cost of doing business. None of the companies mentioned are really investing big bucks to advance new green technologies, BP is running a solar business that is based on "old" solar photovoltaic and is nor the technology of the future. When you are able to report that any of the oil majors are spending over 10% of their anual capital investment on green technologies and are planning to grow it to 25-30% then you are talking real stuff. I am not sure that would be a good thing since they know the oil business but not the alternate energy business and their past track record is lousy. Biofuels are at least similar to the oil business.
    Oct 19, 2008. 08:26 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Can Big Oil Balance Shareholder Interest Against National Interest?  [View article]
    I really would not want "Big Oil" investing my money (through stock holdings) in alternate energy. They have a track record of poor performance (see Exxon's past investments in this area as well as lousy performance by BP and Shell, despite their advertisements to the countrary)) and I would much rather see new businesses emergy in which I will be investing. Transition to an alternate energy scenario first requires new and efficient technology. Investing in currently available and ready to commercialize technology is a lousy deal, they are simply not ready now, but will be with additional R&D&E in the next 5-10 years. Then they can start to grow and will require trillions of investment to be serious players. The transition period, some 20-30 years at least will require significant new fossil fuel energy sources and I would rather have oil companies focus on what they are good at, finding and producing and delivering those resources.
    Jul 8, 2008. 05:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment