Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[affc21] 26/10/2018 09:48

Spid's motives might be to trash any viable competition (in this case VRS which are way ahead in their graphene technology), for any forthcoming attempt in listing FGR shares on AIM.Shorting VRS shares would also fit in with this scenario.Just a thought...

[spid81] 26/10/2018 09:45

Zagrosfold, I always find when someone attacks the person rather than the contents in their post, the simply do not understand,

this is the content from the HC post link above, it doesn't come with the image, I am sure you can click on the link to see what I am talking about

Good morning all,

Both PY and WG have advised me that the Puregraph product information sheet is not for Investors, that it is for Andy Goodwin to use when he talks to the end users scientists.
I will keep asking for a product information sheet to be provided in a easy format so all the investors can understand as I have been told that FGR doesn't need its graphene certified prior to listing on the AIM<<br />
WG has also advised me that the number of layers is not the most important information on a product information sheet, that I should look at the aspect ratio. I will continue on this point in another post.



I have added the Puregraph 5 & 20 to the Puregraph 10 Raman Shift Plot, I have also added the November Product information sheet (that is on the companies website). This has all been done with CAD (computer added design) to measure the levels from each chart and translate this onto the one image, It is not perfect, but it does give us some idea of the improvement from the November Plot.

The Raman shift plot that was in the August Capability statement used a different light intensity reading, It would have been handy to add that one to this plot, as the graphene was independently tested by the University of Adelaide and had a thickness of 1-7 layers.
Nanene's Plot also uses a different light intensity so I cannot add it to the chart,


FGR PUREGRAPH 10.png

Key:
D = Defect band,
G = higher the intensity the higher the number of layers.
2D = The 2D band shape at ca. 2700cm-1 also confirms the absence of graphite.
A strong G band and a low D/G ratio of 0.12 confirming the pristine nature of these products.
Each layer of graphene is .34nm in thickness


What we know from the previous FGR ASX announcements / product information.

November Product Information sheet FGR graphene was 5-10nm in thickness / .34nm (layer thickness) = 15-30 layers. This is represented on the chart with the light intensity @ 16000 (pink line)

I do not understand why the original plots all run from zero (level), where the new plots start at around 400, then run on a slight upward direction.

In the new Product information sheet for the Puregraph Range,

The company has stated the graphene is MLG,
MLG is 3-10 layers in thickness as UoM have previously indicated this on their website.
@Yowie21 indicated that FGR's graphene was vetted as part of the process in joining the GEIC as a Teir 1 member,
recently FGR has entered a sales agreement to supply graphene and other 2d materials with the UoM / GEIC

Puregraph 10 added in Blue & Red for PG20, these plots are very similar with intensity, with P20 having a slightly higher intensity = more layers,

Puregraph 5 (Green) has a much lower intensity that the other products,

Density of FGR graphene vs others
I believe the lower the graphene density is per m3 mean the graphene consists of less layers.

Versarien Nanene - is 90% 10 layers or less, with 60% having 5 layers or less, this has a Tap Density of 162kg per m3
America Elements - average 5 layer, has a Tap Density of 100kg per m3
FGR Puregraph 20 - has a Tap Density of 251kg per m3
FGR Puregraph 10 -has a Tap Density of 124kg per m3
FGR Puregraph 5 - has a Tap Density of only 62kg per m3

With America Elements having a Tap Density of 100kg per m3 and being 5 layers in thickness, and Nanene having 90% of its graphene 10 layer or less with a density of 162 kgs per m3, wouldn't this mean that Puregraph 5 is less than 5 layers in thickness and Puregraph 10 is well under 10 layers?

[spid81] 26/10/2018 09:43

Fantastic work Jointer nothing like using a old presentation to cause doubt, was this deliberate ? one will have to question why.


Why did't you look at the puregraph range product information sheet that is on the website. you will soon notice they are significantly different, Versarien will see similar changes when they go through commissioning a larger unit.

Puregraph product range,



Or you can see all of the Raman Shift plots including the old one, on my HC post,

[ny boy] 26/10/2018 09:37

Show some backbone bulls, totally spineless, wobbling around like headless drunken chickens every time another punter sells @ 115p, grow a pair if you want this above 120p, pathetic showing so far.

[bobsworth] 26/10/2018 09:31

Taking to themselves - sad eh!

loglorry126 Oct '18 - 09:04 - 43692 of 43708 (Filtered)

spid8126 Oct '18 - 09:05 - 43693 of 43708 (Filtered)

loglorry126 Oct '18 - 09:07 - 43694 of 43708 (Filtered)

[zagrosfold] 26/10/2018 09:28

spid81 is just thick and assumes everyone else is.

[club sandwich] 26/10/2018 09:23

Squire - well we *know* it's coming (or at least we hope it is!), we just don't know when, and neither do you... ;-)

[senden11] 26/10/2018 09:20

spid81 also filtered - as courteous and intelligent as you sound, you are engaging with someone who is actively attempting to take up my time and erode my wealth!

[foolishben] 26/10/2018 09:18

senden / pshevlin, thank you. loglorry1.....filtered!

[jointer13] 26/10/2018 09:15

I would much rather listen to the expertise of some on here who have been here a long time...eg

serratia - 21 Oct 2018 - 11:56:37 - 41892 of 43648
VRS The world lead in real Graphene (Nanene) - VRS
A technical comment on Graphene quality/performance.

An ideal Graphene for composites should have the following properties - Low layer number, optimal lateral size. There are also indications that non carbon edge groups are important for dispersion.
Layer number - Sub 10 layer material has the best performance in terms of strength. There isn't a switch in performance at a set level number. Too many layers decreases the strength, probably around 20 layers. There will be some improvements below that number of layers with improvements increasing as the layer number falls.
Lateral size - Too short and the benefits are lost. Too long and the platelets fold during dispersion and strength is compromised as they unfold under stress.

What I am seeing is some Graphenes giving strength improvements but less than can be achieved with optimal material.

As an example using XG's Graphene they say in their annual report -

HDPE

Plastic composite parts manufacturer demonstrating 25% increase in tensile strength.

Sheet moulding compound.

Plastics composite part manufacturer demonstrating 7-30% improvement in strength.

Both of these figures are well below the benefits seen using Nanene. This confirms what XG data sheets imply. Their material shows some benefits but is inferior to Nanene. A customer might be pleased to get a 25% strength benefit if they haven't tried Nanene.
(Disclosure I have a science degree and an Engineering PhD so read many technical papers on the subject)

[pshevlin] 26/10/2018 09:15

foolish. Just left click on logs name and from the list that appears choose filter. That's all you need to do to preserve your sanity.

[spid81] 26/10/2018 09:15

Morning Loglorry,

I think you need to convert it into kgs
VRS production 365 kg's
FGR production 90,000 kg's

Did you read FGR's announcement Today ?

Agreement Signed with Chemiplas to Test PureGRAPH™ Graphene in Sports Equipment

PureGRAPH™ readily disperses into Chemiplas’s polymer resins
to give enhanced performance.


The polyurethane used by Chemiplas in its range of recreational equipment. This strengthens our application base for enhanced performance of rubber products through the addition of PureGRAPH™ graphene. The ease of use of PureGRAPH™ is particularly pleasing as it improves performance without disrupting existing manufacturing processes.

@ pshevlin & ridicule, are you still seeing a bucket / low grade applications,

Or are you starting to see the US $53 billion market ?

[senden11] 26/10/2018 09:13

foolishben, to filter, just click on name and select from drop down box, as I have just done to nellyb

[spike_1] 26/10/2018 09:12

Motive a simple straightforward word. Over the last couple of weeks we've had a number of new posters who continually question VRS's valuation and or the quality of their graphene, etc etc.

Clearly they are so downbeat about VRS that they obviously have not invested in it, or if they have, then they will have sold.

Motive - one has to ask therefore why they are on this BB continually attempting to rubbish VRS and or its valuation.

ANSWER is bloody obvious - they are shorting VRS, so it makes no sense whatsoever to listen to their one sided arguments - why - because most of us have been in VRS for sufficiently long to know exactly what we have invested in. Many of us have met the CEO, and have gone to Investor Days and or AGM's.

Obviously some here are desperate to get the price down as far as they can as quick as they can before China or other major news hits, either to retain profit or reduce their loss.

Reading their posts makes no sense at all - simple.

Best wishes - Spike

[squire007] 26/10/2018 09:11

LOg, is two years out of date, flush him .......... pmsl.

[foolishben] 26/10/2018 09:09

nellyb - cardinal sin, don't engage the troll. Let him talk to himself, he'll soon get bored. I don't know how to filter so I just don't read his messages. I honestly haven't read a single one in over a week as I while I am always open to listening to a rational bear case, he simply doesn't have one to offer. Right I'll get back in my box now, good weekend to you all.

[loglorry1] 26/10/2018 09:07

@nellyb I don't need the shareprice to do anything.

Can you tell me nellyb why SuperG has become so ludicrous lately? Last week Nanene was a cure for cancer. Today they've solved the battery problem with the purchase of Gnanomat.

Really, does anyone believe this stuff? I suppose it beats stories of death threats.

Log - how much do you need the share price to go down before you break-even.

[loglorry1] 26/10/2018 09:04

Whilst the science of graphene production is no doubt important, I suspect the proclivity of certain individuals to assert quality issues, is blinding them to the more practical business matters.

More practical matters like for example actually producing any Graphene.

FGR have CURRENT production at 100mt/year. Others similar levels like XGS etc. etc. Meanwhile we THINK VRS is at 0.365mt/year although that's not really been confirmed other than in power point presentations which we know have typos!

[nellyb] 26/10/2018 09:01

Log - how much do you need the shareprice to go down before you break-even.

[loglorry1] 26/10/2018 08:57

I thought Zap n Go had solved the battery conundrum aswell?



LOL, well before they do that they might like to file their accounts on time.



Does this look like a company that has solved the battery conundrum to you?