On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 4:55:07 PM UTC+13, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 17/01/2015 2:46 PM, William Mook wrote:
On Saturday, January 17, 2015 at 2:27:44 PM UTC+13, Sylvia Else
wrote:
On 16/01/2015 6:19 PM, William Mook wrote:

I said these things can be built and explain why they would be
relatively inexpensive and because of this low expense relative
to larger systems more things can be tried out.

So you're looking for someone to fund your R&D. Presumably they'll
want significant equity in your business as a result.

Sylvia.

You are putting words in my mouth Sylvia. I never asked anyone to
fund any research.

I merely said I am happy to share information with qualified buyers
who sign enforceable agreements to keep what they learn secret.

I have said what I have for sale.

I have told you why I won't show photos of what I'm doing and given a
reasonable explanation of why that is.

In response you have been very unfair in interpreting things and now
are putting words in my mouth.

You seem far fairer and open minded than others who have at every
turn attempted to slander me, but you are abandoning that pretense to
fairness in these comments.


You seem to have admitted that there's no working hardware,

I never said that at all.

so the basic
R&D has not yet been completed.

Didn't say that either.

You really have nothing to sell,

That's quite the opposite of what I've said.

yet
you're talking about buyers.

Yes.

A reasonable interpretation is that you're
hoping they'll front the cash so that you can build a prototype.

Your understanding of finance is rather limited for you to say that.

If it
doesn't work, the buyer won't get their money back,

Wait a minute, you asserted something that wasn't true, and are no arguing from your false assertion a false conclusion. shrug It may make sense to you, but only if you accept the baseless assertions you're selling! lol.

so they'd be taking
a development risk.

Nonsense.


Sylvia.