RE:RE:RE:Nanoxplore is aiming in the good direction Directvoice,
NanoXplore has increased it's quarter over quarter and year over year losses and would continue to do so.
Pedro Azevedo calls it "losses from investments".
In the case of VoltaXplore, it would be incessantly continued losses due to any incoming grant monies and investment tax credit monies needing to be made to disappear down the VoltaXplore sink; with every cent plus being siphoned out after being poured down the VoltaXplore sink.
By the way, should you want to know more accurately what amount of loss, due to continued expenditures (G&A and R&D relating expenditures and the like), VoltaXplore would continue to contribute to NanoXplore balance sheet, you need only determine the amount of grant monies and investment tax rebate monies NanoXplore would be receiving.
Soroush Nazarpour and the other representatives over at that NanoXplore VoltaXplore "sink" are collectively planning to make all those grant monies disappear, due to whatever expendtures they can come up with.
In addition to all those grant monies and investment tax credit relating monies being tossed down that VoltaXplore sink (that's at least $1 Million), you'll find that an additional $200,000.00 to $600,000.00 per annum of added expenditures owning to G&A and ramped up R&D relating costs would routinely result .
Alas, I have seen this kind of VoltaXplore sink and siphoning off by way of ongoing expenditures type "horror show" before.
That's correct. Mr. Nazarpour and Pedro Azevedo first hit NanoXplore "minority" shareholders right between the eyes with a year over year 5x+ increased and 2.6 Million + loss attributable to VoltaXplore; and then afterwards remind us, i.e. following the subsequent posting of losses attributable to VoltaXplore which are less than $2.6 Million + and yet still quite enormous (e.g. 1.6 Million +), that they did as they said and greatly reduced losses attributable to the VoltaXplore "sink" and expenditures facilitated "siphoning" maneuvers. They are not smarter than God people. What they are doing with VoltaXplore relating expenditures is all too typical.
The way I see it, VoltaXplore has to be taken completely off the NanoXplore balance sheet.
For GRA.T "minority equities investors especially, VoltaXplore has become "a white elephant" and would likely be made to remain as such for at least the next three to four, perhaps even five years.
The relatively very costly "SiGTM" anode additive material product development ,validation, qualifiaction and certification process should be conducted in collaboration with a necessarily very publicly named joint venture partner/licensee/customer/capital financier. Preferably with a battery cells manufacturer like Samsung SDI and one of it's automotive manufacturer partners, e.g. Stellantis.
VoltaXplore also has to be forthwith monetized. You do so by comprehensively licensing out, through VoltaXplore of course, the "SiGTM" intellectual property; thus gaining an initial immediate upfront immense cash payment from the licensee and then have the licensee go about mass industrial scale manufacturing not just "SiGTM" battery material enhanced battery cells within it's own facilities. Such a licensee can go about mass industrial scale manufacturing battery cells featuring all NanoXplore proprietary graphene enhanced battery component materials on offer, anodes cathodes and electrolyte.