Interesting discussion, Loop, and I appreciate your optimism about the MB collaboration. However, there are a few critical points we should consider:
First, we don’t know the key terms of the R&D collaboration between MB and Primobius. It’s unclear whether MB has any IP rights stemming from this piloting phase, which could impact the long-term value of the technology. Some clarity on this would be very helpful.
Second, on the technical side, the idea of ‘tweaking’ a process here and there for different battery types is not how chemical processing works. Chemical processes, especially at this scale, need to be continuous, stable, and capable of producing materials that meet battery makers’ strict quality requirements. You either have a process that works or you don’t! It’s not as simple as adjusting for every new battery design. If we’re over-customizing for MB batteries, how do we scale this for other OEMs? Would that mean starting new pilots and R&D collaborations all over again?
Finally, it makes me wonder if relying so much on external R&D collaborations is the best way forward for a technology company. After years of piloting and collaboration, we still haven’t seen any concrete outcomes, and as someone who has already experienced significant losses, it’s frustrating. That’s why I’m asking these questions, because I think we all want to understand if this strategy can actually deliver results in the long run.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
