the_Chief wrote: Not at all. If you actually read the nr, it says, they have created a single cell, which is smaller then the flat silverish battery in your garage door opener. They have physically filled the cell with Albany graphite. Now they await the report on the characterisitcs and whether they meet or exceed, or fail as a LIB.
So, in one year thats how far you have progressed. No feedback on functionality, just form. Now they will make a full cell, which is about the size of a C battery in physical size. While waiting to be told if the battery, holds a charge as well, discharges and charges as well as spberical or synthetic. The cell will be monitored for heat during charfe, resisitivity and conductivity measurements taken. So what this NR said in tge "form fit and function" categories is, we can make form it into a battery, we can fit it into the case, but we have no idea if it will operate as a battery.
Which tells you, no real testing that makes graphite, graphite, has been done. So it was a nice fluffy NR with no meat, but written very elloquently, so AE did not write it.
So to confirm, find anything in that nr, that describes "function" tough to do eh?
PEA is a long way off, so this must be a PP pop.
ceosss wrote: Care to take back any of your fantisies in this thread Chief?
the_Chief wrote: Of course I do not know that for a fact. However, its the premise I have used since seeing the crystallinity tests in 2013. That NR led me to believe that they had flow sheet issues. I would suggest that the new flow sheet is "more viable" then the last one. However, the mere fact that AE avoids telling you what flotation numbers actually are makes me still suspect its not "viable enough" ie. UP TO 92.5%".
So if the purity is not up to client specs yet at 99.95 then my assumption still is, that its notthe purity at all. It is the flakes have been ground sufficiently to destroy the characteristics of the flakes.
None of you even bother to think what tbe NR mesnt. How can a graphite be nuclear purity, yet not piure enough for your clients? Easy answer they tossed inthe word purity so you would not realize that they really mesnt characteristics. I figure they ruined the conductivity and resistivity numbers
ceosss wrote: The bolding didn't come out very well. Specifically, I'm wondering about this line:
All the samples up till now are either damaged or otherwise.
Can you elaborate?
ceosss wrote: the_Chief wrote: I always find it interesting how people can rationalize both situations at once and no one questions them. Probably the best calls I have ever made can be attached to ZEN. Including the bottom of $1.04. Yet somehow even though flawlessly right on ZEN, including the last call to buy back before the 20th to take advantage of tax loss sellers buying back, I somehow am disliked for being right lol
Example 2 where I have been wrong CCB is somehow held against me for being right on ZEN.
So if you look at the last predictions on ZEN I have said the following
1) Bottom $1.04
2) Trade $1.34-47
3) Pop 1.56 which may signal run to $1.80 as tax losers by back
5) End of Jan PEA or collapse to $1.36
6) Trade $1.29-47 while you wait for May/Jun PEA
CCB I have been wrong. The VSE Index has not helped, but, the nice thing is CCB should be trading at .37-.52c right now. So risk is as close to zerovas you can get, of any stock I have ever owned including ZEN
ZEN
1) The reason AE was quoted as saying there was no money in concentrate when he delayed the PEA was because there was NO MONEY IN HIS CONCENTRATE!
2) Thats because he had no viable flow sheet. The process was neither cheap or easy
3) I believe they had to do alot of grinding and that not only killed their large flakes but also damaged their smaller flakes
4) So at notime has ZEN been able to sell concentrate for a good profit using their previous flow sheet. Thats why when others were laughing at me saying there would be no PEA IN 2014 . The addicted kept saying "run out of town" as some sort of guarantee their would be a PEA.
So why do I believe you will not have a PEA till May/Jun? Its easy. All the samples up till now are either damaged or otherwise. The same samples that AE proclaimed that THERE IS NO MONEY IN CONCENTRATE so went designer.
SGS DOES NOT DO DESIGNER. So my bet is the 7-46 micron grinding is being called "designer"!
So he has three options. Release a PEA with a poor price per ton. Or wait for any new samples from new flow sheet to be tested by end users MAY/JUN.
Or thirdly drill more in spring and do a production level test with the new flow sheet and see what you get.
Have a nice day.
Chief, I've seen you insinuate this before, do you know this for a fact?