real competition or ip breach, page-17

Fuelcell,

Thanks for the reply, but your two posts to Staz and I (and many others) simply proves my point, that you cannot present an unbiased opinion on these companies.

Here's how you present them:

Ceres - units failed in trial, staff left, on the way back with cash, but no units before 16/17 if at all, as no one knows whether they can sort their tech out. Prob you're most accurate assessment

CFU - will be lucky to survive, even though they are producing and selling commercial units years ahead of the other two fuel cell companies, that have shown exceptional reliability, but doomed to fail even though they are active in 4-5 key markets, with strong legislative support. Yes, need funding, but considering the points above, simply a matter of price

Redox - Haven't produced a unit yet, but unlike Ceres, will no doubt be able to produce a 25kw unit that works perfectly, instantly finds a market and costs exactly what they project as part of their hype campaign, even though they haven't made one yet. Have nothing to show for their hype.

Everyone on here values opinions, even those contrary to our own if they are well thought out and reasoned, but FuelCell, you seem have to gone passed that and your bias against CFU pervades all your thoughts. Just like you can fall in love with a stock, you can love to hate one and both are dangerous things.

If you were waiting for bottom to get in cheap, look behind you, its been and gone!