Magnegas Fuel

Okay, THAT is the discussion I was hoping to see in this thread!

Agreed, thanks for showing that. I saw that before but it was from 2010 and seemed like a dead end.

Pantaz, please keep in professional and you won't ruin it for everybody again.

Whether the Rossi-Focardi "fusion" process, or this Santilli stuff, Italian physics seems lately to be a laughingstock. No one correctly addresses the relevant technical concerns, but if stock is selling well to gullible investors, we hear all about that. Unfortunately, socially constructed "reality" often crashes.

Tornado, As usual thanks so much for your intelligent comments.

The stock is selling well because the product is selling well.

As I have always said the founder is a special kind of guy but the product works and fills an important requirement in the metal cutting market.

Roshan, Your post on the other thread was:

"How many $ we have to paid for purchasing 1gallon of magnegas fuel ?"

I have absolutely no idea, MagneGas is sold primarily in gas bottles right now but I believe it is target priced at or lower as acetylene so whatever a bottle of acetylene is in your area chances are the price of a MagneGas bottle will be the same.

Cheers,

p.s. All I have never met Roshan and have no idea who he is.... believe me!

Still waiting for the information you promised to present...

I think I've given you what I know.

What more were you waiting for please?

How about responding to the myriad unanswered questions in this thread? I'll make it easy and link just the direct questions:

Post #11

Post #24

Post #25

Post #27

That should get us started on the "meaningful conversation".

I believe I answered them all to the best of my ability apart from your question #25 which I didn't answer on purpose before we settled a few matters.

Anyway here is the recap:

Post #11:

My response post #12:

Lyn, I worked with MagneGas off and on - which is exactly what a discussion like this needs, someone who actually knows something about the subject matter.

The reactions I see here is expected, the theories are yet to be proven, the creator is a special kind of guy and the website is not the best. So those who skim the surface frequently can be drawn to these sorts of superficial "it's b*ll*cks" meaningless reactions. That said those who have visited their facilities or seen their equipment in operation or even just cut with their gas usually, though not always come away MagneGas converts.

That said it works! The gas cuts when it shouldn't and the chemical / biological tests show 100% sterilization.

It's important to keep things professional and logical and based on facts, I have been totally honest about what my experiences have been.

Again I'd be happy to answer whatever professional questions you throw my way.....

Post #24 & 27:

My response post #12:

Hello there Lyn,

The electricity costs are 300kW per hour, so at $0.10 per kWh that would be $30 per hour. The other costs are what you'd expect for a unit which operates semi-autonomously, overheads et cetera.

In this application the main cost is the feedstock which in Tampa they use Ethyl Glycol and that amounts to approximately 12% of sales.

So that leaves post #25:

I believe MagneGas sells 150 cft bottles individually or cascades don't ask me the pressure!

Regarding reduced logistics costs I have no access to that information.

Cost of Ethyl Glycol is about $500 for a 55 gallon drum

Cost to refill a 200 cft bottle of Acetylene is now running around $50

I'd appreciate an explanation of your statements,

"the theories are yet to be proven"

and,

"The gas cuts when it shouldn't".

Pantaz,

About theories like I said before I am neither a scientist nor an engineer and I steer clear of the "Magnecule" theory, frankly I don't care since the gas does what it's supposed to do.

BUT

I believe that MagneGas (65% H2 / 35% CO) is similar to Syngas - can anybody confirm the Syngas composition for me?

From what I see on the web and discussions in the industry this is a correct statement but would appreciate some help.

Here is a latest new release from MagneGas Corp:

http://ir.stockpr.com/magnegas/company-news/detail/893

Yet another press release. Posted by you for the second time. Yawn.

Have you looked into EarthFirst/NextGas/BigSpark for any connection to your comany? (See post #15)

Pantaz,

Yeah of course I posted it again, Admin slapped my hand (correctly) for "slamming" Tornado, but I see you are slipping back into your old ways again after learning your lesson.

Between you and Tornado it is pointless which is a shame because with all the bright minds on this site it would be good to have a professional discussion.

If you have any further questions about MagneGas please contact:

Scott Wainwright

CR4 Admin - phone number and email address removed

From the CR4 Rules: Do not post phone numbers or email addresses. The CR4 Admin will delete all phone numbers and email addresses posted in threads or comments. You can share this information via the CR4 internal messaging system.

Oh? What "lesson" is that? That I transposed a couple of figures? You may not remember, but near the beginning of this circus I stated that I would gladly correct any factual errors. Your repeated whining about MGNA stock did get me to go back and re-calculate the numbers -- something you apparently are unable to do -- and so I found and corrected my own error and presented the results.

If you think that silly spreadsheet exercise makes MGNA look successful, I'd be happy to present numbers for some other companies in comparison.

ETA: I will be heading to the mountains on Friday, so don't expect to hear from me until Monday.

Feel free to "ram home" whatever point you think your making. I'm sure that's how you see it in your mind.

It appears that you take any hint of negativity towards Magnegas to be a personal attack. It's not.

I'll address more of this later. It's late and I've had a long day.

First, I want to be absolutely clear about my thoughts on MagneGas as a business. I have no doubt that they are producing and selling a legitimate product (the metal cutting fuel) at a competitive price. The plasma arc device may or may not be reasonably priced -- the market will ultimately decide that fact.

As for the technical aspects, I'm still hopeful we can get back to that very soon.

On to the fact checking.

GlobalReach, post #60: "... after all my posts telling you that you were wrong ..."

Let's expand on that assertion...

I presented my initial calculations in post #34.

1. In your post #36 you offer a claim of overall market value increase, but you do not address my figures for "average daily change".
2. With post #38 you present a non-standard calculation of YOY. Again, no reference to my (also non-standard) calculated figures.
3. Post #40 offers some grossly misleading claims of astounding stock performance, but still no reference to my calculation.
4. Finally, in post #42 you do reference my incorrect calculation. However, you failed to describe the actual error.
   

With my very next post I reviewed my spreadsheet and reported the error I found. I even shared the spreadsheet so that anyone interested could check it over for accuracy.

By your own words, "Ok, Thanks lets move on!" (#44), it seemed we were finally going to get some answers to our technical questions. It didn't last long.

Feeling unsatisfied with your limited responses, I made a snarky comment (#56) on your posting of a press release. So, rather than address any of the unanswered questions, you responded in kind. No big deal, this is an Internet forum, I expect such things. I replied (#58) with my view of the events, to which you offered a rant (#60) unsupported by the facts. That brings us to this post.

In summary, out of four posts where you argue about stock performance, only once did you actually mention the calculations I had presented, but even then you failed to identify a specific error. Somehow, you think that equates to "teaching me a lesson". Odd.

In closing, I'm quite sure that you'll disagree with virtually everything I've just written, and you will furiously respond with yet more unsupported assertions. FYI: I spent some time this evening looking more closely at MNGA reports. I recommend you do the same.

You may be an engineer but I am a finance guy.....

Do you really think that I didn't spot you obvious error immediately, it's not that hard I was saying it was going up and you were saying it was going down....?

Is there a slim possibility that I was just letting you keep on digging?

If you want I can point out your 2nd error?

Up to you.

"If you want I can point out your 2nd error?"

Please do! I've asked several times for any errors to be corrected.

Ok,

"For the period 30-Dec-2010 through 30-Dec-2011, the average daily change in stock price was -0.0023 (negative 2.3 cents). Oh, you said January 1st, so let's recalculate those figures -- That changes it to... -0.0022 (negative 2.2 cents)."

Do you see anything incorrect with what I have quoted from your post #42?

First, post #42 is yours.

The quoted text is from #34, and after you quoted it I corrected in #43, which you acknowledged in #44.

You said I made a second error. I'll ask again, please point it out and I will gladly post a correction.

"That changes it to... -0.0022 (negative 2.2 cents)."

You made a decimal place error on the above.

So incorrect +/- sign compounded by a decimal error.

"You made a decimal place error on the above."

Good catch. So, just to be pedantic, the correct value from the spreadsheet is $0.0022.

On to more interesting stuff...

I step away from the computer for a couple of days and come back to all this activity!

Guess I've got some reading to do...

Welcome back,

Yeah a few more posts here but not the best but hit on some good topics. If we've clear the misunderstanding from 34.5 that came of out left field then I am happy.

Sorry admin!

Scott Wainwright can be reached at the main number of the MagneGas website, he is the President, he is a great guy and would be happy to chat with you to answer questions on MagneGas.

Does the name Justin K. Davis ring any bells?

Recent Article about MagneGas in Gasworld, good explanation of their value proposition:

http://content.stockpr.com/magnegas/media/ea924495e26709c557abf1ccd83d65da.pdf

This thread may be dead but I bumped into it as I was doing some additional research to buy the MNGA stock for a second time. Here's a couple facts from an actual investor, I bought the MNGA stock @ 10 cents a couple years back on the otcbb and sold my shares fairly recently for $7.50 on the NASDAQ (Keep in mind there was a 10 to 1 reverse split so $7.50 divided by 10 = .75) I have followed magnegas very closely and so far they delivered. Whole reason why I may be buying again is because of a recent report from northland securities predicting magnegas to outperform. also the US navy and general motors are possible customers, from my understanding Edison welding supply (naval welding company) recently tested 5 gases and only 2 gases made it to the second part of their test (hands on testing) I believe one was acetylene and the other was Magnegas (not too sure what the other gas was to be honest so don't quote me on that, mightve been acetylene or propane). As an investor I would like to see some binding contracts to these huge companies, my guess is, all investors would. Also, magnegas is also in a slump right now and they have successfully almost doubled their clientele and should be ready to mass produce within a year. I personally think it's a great buy if someone is just starting, price is low and potential is huge if you can't afford stocks over $10.00 then chances are almost every stock you look to buy will have huge risk factors involved, the risk/reward on MNGA is more bearable than others and some analyst's have even called mnga a "gem" (this is my personal opinion and should not be used as professional or otherwise) I personally think this company is way beyond the "hoax" and "scam" stage if it has completed a full year of testing with the united states navy and has actually passed to the second stage of testing. I'm sure the us navy puts ANY product they remotely intend use through tedious testing processes the biggest skeptic wouldn't even think of using. hope this clears things up a bit :) but it will probably confuse :( anyway, good luck and thanks for your time.