just some points to ponder from the discussion today. from the...

just some points to ponder from the discussion today.

from the ferro case filings



I asked a friend why he thought Anteotech has created so many different divisions and his reply was - it's not for tax purposes . yet I replied. or is it for one of our partners to claim an equity stake in a section of our tech? not sure but management are leaving themselves options IMO...

also with our tech, it has always proved to be cutting edge but new management has added another selling point to it, cost reducing.

in life science, significant reduction in antibody usage >30% and labour 40%



with batteries the focus has always been lighter, smaller, cheaper and faster charging



from the AABC presentation we had the potential saving of using anteoX with an optimised anode design of around $589US.

this isn't for our high silicon anode design which will provide a major increase in the energy retention which would further allow a smaller lighter battery, making it cheaper again and then with 70% silicon replacing more expensive components making the battery even cheaper again.

could cost reduction and increased performance in both divisions spark commercial deals to be signed?IMO  it makes a compelling reason. hoping the production facility gets commissioned early in the NY and we crack the 1000 cycle with our high silicon anode tech and 2024 will be interesting for ADO holders.

merry Xmas to all of you.....