Does low SP perhas suit the management?, page-74

@fooca please bring up historical information when it serves the purpose of dissing another member who rightly brought up the rejection of the R & D Innovation expenditure but don't discuss any historical information that disrespects management please



@gcdany you're not wrong that it was disallowed (twice) but I think their reasons are interesting.

They said it was not expenditure on "innovation by Greenpower".




We are now looking to have an American firm build our PDU unit. Personally I would have liked to have it built by an Australian firm (sorry, not sorry, @ans25) and I hope that country of manufacture doesn't impact any decision on the upcoming grant from the Federal Government.



But, this has reminded me of another potential future issue that @Scarpa addressed a long time ago ....

The PDU was built in 2013, in 2014/15 Thermaquatica were working on getting the OHD process for conversion up and running and then were contracted to produce the product to ship to Monash for trials. But in 2015 the Australian Government rejected our R & D innovation expenditure because it was not on "innovation by Greenpower" ... no of course it's not - we are contributing to the R & D of Thermaquatica! When If they build a commercial plant who will HRL most likely work with and contribute all their intellectual property to, I suspect for free also

Yet Thermaquatica hold the patent and we are required to pay licence fees and the like. Furthermore if we ever want the world wide rights we appear to only have the right to put a business case for it and then PAY for a licence.



... things that make me go hmmm