1) nope. graphene is by definition single layer, the properties of single layer are so vastly different to 2 or more layers that they cannot in good faith be called the same material. Man U does not get to decide this, the clue is in the term 'graphene related' that Man U used. Check out the work being done at NUS, the prof there chuckles when folks talk about 'graphene' when really they mean 'micrographite'.
2) Yeah righto, so that 'only' 1m difference turns out to be also be about 100% more no? so if TLG have twice as much in the bank they will both need funds at the same time? Yet FGR 'should' get their oppies over the line for a timely cash injection in the near term (and not 2018 and beyond) and IMO are closer to nailing an agreement for supply of graphene than what TLG are, simply because the numbers are smaller, and they are pursuing boutique opportunities for which they can begin supply a whole lot faster than what TLG can (other than via stockpiles) TLG are chasing big fish with a 5lb line at the moment. Moreover other than on Craig, most of the cash is being spent on folks doing the business of mining, rather than science or PR or negotiation. Sure perhaps those particular scientists will make the breakthroughs, but the odds are against them. Better to fund the research costs rather than salaries, and look for opportunities for IP IMO than spend so much on folks that may not come up with anything, again IMO.
FGR Price at posting:
12.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
