a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote:
Jed wrote: Ridiculous to assert that IH have not acting in good faith - if
> the demo worked they would be the happiest people in the world and would be
> on track to make vast amounts of money . . .
That wasn't me, but I agree.
> Suppose IH thought the E-Cat would not meet the test criteria of COP 6 (IH
> were having trouble doing it)? Remember Rossi was using s different
> version, the 250kW modules. If the test failed, having the IP they could
> then go on developing it themselves. They are building a new lab.
>
Surely they would have to pay royalties in that case. I expect they would
end up paying a lot more than $89 million if the technology succeeds in the
marketplace.
$89 million is a very reasonable sum if the technology works, even if it
needs more development. Actually, that is dirt cheap. It is only too much
to pay if, as I.H. claims, they have not been able to "substantiate" it.
("Substantiate" could mean a lot of things, I suppose.)
- Jed
