View Single Post
Old 10-29-2011, 12:34 PM   #44 (permalink)
user removed
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by basslover911 View Post
Exactly. Although I do agree, R&D costs a lot. However, for $2.9 i don't want a conversion, I want a complete car with near production quality (maybe 30% of the way there to production).

Really the thing that insulted me the most was their "new technology" that would solve the hydrogen embrittlement problem. They said that they could not tell me because they haven't patented it yet. So two problems, 1) why are they asking for money when they don't even have the patent on that yet? 2) But most importantly, it really insulted me.

Why would I go out, get money from investors with whom I have great relationships with, and not know what I am selling? If their idea is SO great, they shouldn't even need me because the product would be selling itself. However, its not (at least as far as I know they haven't raised a single dime- although other investors have allegedly 'committed to $600,000 - right, we all know how that goes).
Precisely. If an inventor has the capital he does not need investors. Of course invention itself is not the kind of effort that increases ones net worth. Countless numbers of inventors have died in relative poverty only to have their efforts see fruition when capital came into the equation.

Once empirical proof of the concept allows the transition to a real tested machine of superior efficiency, then there is little need for capital to continue the process. Investors will line up and compete for the privilege of ownership of the new machine that easily proves to be superior to everything that preceded it.

The difference between Rudolf Diesel and Edison was capital. Both of their efforts proved to be fantastic advancements over the previous status quo.

Diesel died mysteriously on a ferry at night. Edison became one of the most successful inventors.

The most basic requirement of my design was that it would provide a INEXPENSIVE improvement to the status quo. 25% fewer parts per vehicle means lower manufacturing costs. It's easy to make a better car without considering the cost of the finished product, but if you can beat the price of any cheap car now and provide close to 100% improvement in fuel mileage, you don't even need to try to sell the finished product. With a world market for manufacturing and sales of cars there will always be one company that can see the potential and build the product.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote