@Tradingday I have completed extensive research on PPK, BNNT &...

@Tradingday I have completed extensive research on PPK, BNNT & LIS – if there was any data I would have come across it.

I have also looked at other battery technology companies internationally to see what any potential competitor may have. Most battery companies I see globally are keeping shareholders interested by feeding them some bait; this often comes in the form of flashy announcements, unrealistic charge/discharge cycle reporting, conducting tests under controlled conditions, announcing financial backing (or partnerships) from various sources – all aimed at giving a perception of legitimacy. The vast majority are trying to squeeze more efficiency out of Lion, 30 year old tech.

Where LIS Energy differs;
- Technology backed and legitimised by Deakin University (in the top 1% of Uni’s globally)
- With the years it's taken to develop BNNT and LIS nobody will catch them – we are talking decades.
- Collaboration Partners who are helping to see the technology through to commercialisation in the field; which benefits both parties
- Removal of heavy metals, a sustainable product
- A portfolio of IP opportunities
- NDA’s with large global companies
- The steps to commercialisation that all make complete sense
- No need for hype or BS!

Dr Lee has stated that the testing takes time and cannot be sped up with money.

LIS Energy have stated that one customer would require 10,000 batteries for testing (obviously not some backyard crew).

Given the level of interest in LIS Energy from many companies we are talking a lot of batteries required for testing by NDA’s and Collaboration Partners, how many, I don’t know?

The only people who would know the answers to your question are high level engineering science specialists within the LIS Energy/Deakin team.

LIS Energy are selling the steak not the sizzle……they are keeping everything under wraps……as a shareholder that is exactly what we want.

IMO DYOR