Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[zagrosfold] 03/12/2018 09:48

The more log posts the more i keep buying. Great confidence signal. Many advent days to come.

[loglorry1] 03/12/2018 09:45

A decent analysis of that here

and on collaborations here




--------------------
Perhaps the results on Thursday will be better than expected. Here's hoping anyway.

[loglorry1] 03/12/2018 09:40

Oh do shut up @Club you got the chance to win a T-Shirt what more do you want?

-------------
Why is it that our supposedly-inferior competitors, selling supposedly-inferior products, are getting orders and investments, while we wait endlessly for Ricketts to deliver anything much of value?

[dolores123] 03/12/2018 09:39

Perhaps the results on Thursday will be better than expected. Here's hoping anyway.

[laginaneil] 03/12/2018 09:33

Morning all,
Ellis -Maybe I'm stupid but what's all this talk about Haydale someone takes 9.9%
stake at 170p...

I see it's dated 03 Feb 2017 ?

They now 50p ish

[cheek212] 03/12/2018 09:27

This is just a typical Monday morning share reaction on AIM when no RNS news! Traders dumping first thing as no news to push the price up.

[willoicc] 03/12/2018 09:24

Whatever people say about VRS Graphene and Nanene, the Chinese seem to be very happy.

That's good enough for me against the bashers on here.

[jointer13] 03/12/2018 09:24

whinge..whinge..whinge

[pshevlin] 03/12/2018 09:22

If only I had such an effect on the sp!

[pshevlin] 03/12/2018 09:21

There is 25k dumped at 8.15. More to follow I suspect and we still don't know who is doing it.

[tim3416] 03/12/2018 09:21

Probably because you've been moaning about it all morning pshevlin

[pshevlin] 03/12/2018 09:20

I'd still like to know why this is my one red share today.

[loglorry1] 03/12/2018 09:20

@Dave also worth pointing out that VRS's Head of Research Dr Stephen Hodge (@nanosteve1) was asked this exact question, as to why Nanene has such a low surface area if it is FLG, on Twitter. He ducked the answer. Maybe other members of #vrsfamily would like to try

[pshevlin] 03/12/2018 09:19

OK didn't know you had filtered him.

[potsol] 03/12/2018 09:18

So if it is being removed from t'internet, it wasn't meant to be out in public domain, meaning the intention is for the mainstream to be in the dark.

[superg1] 03/12/2018 09:17

Chill

It's a farce.

Warwick said the same about Talga, piled in as an investor and now thinks it's junk.

Claims he makes have to be lies, FGR can't possibly know the production costs of the 100's of claimed graphene producers.

It's deceitful BS at it's best to excite investors.

[loglorry1] 03/12/2018 09:14

@Dave yes and it's not just surface area that doesn't seem to agree with the Raman layers. Density also doesn't seem to fit. Nanene has a bulk density of 187kg/m3 that is far more dense than a lot of competing products.

It has been explained to me that the way Raman works to measure layers is you look at a few platelets and measure each. The ratio of the size of peaks in reflected wavelength tells you the number of layers for the platelets you are inspecting. It's not clear in the tech sheets supplied by VRS how many platelets were tested or how they were selected. Therefore its hard to know how accurate this data is.

Also worth pointing out that VRS has never to my knowledge tested their product from a scaled up process. They are only just now implementing a 3T production process. It is therefore impossible to know how reliable their data is at scale.


------------------------
spid does have a point though, somebody on here must be able to explain the discrepancy between the Raman data and the surface area data on Nanene's datasheet.

[superg1] 03/12/2018 09:13

No he's on filter that's the whole point of filter. I'd have to ban myself I did. No idea what he is saying.

[pshevlin] 03/12/2018 09:10

Super, are you going to respond to timbo?

[superg1] 03/12/2018 09:05

I'm not pot, the stuff I've been finding is following a sequence of being removed from the web after I reported it to those that matter.

[timbo003] 03/12/2018 08:58

Mornin' spid

re your post #51080 (copied below)

superg has difficulty with simple maths, he messed up on his calculation in post #43891 as he did not take into account that 2630m2/g refers to only one side of a single layer (not two).

Graphene platelets have two lateral surfaces, so a more accurate way of estimating number of layers for Nanene using the superg method would have been:

(2 X 2630)/45 = 117 layers



Hi Jointer,

According to SuperG1, it would appear that VRS are selling graphite not graphene if you use his calculation on determining layers.

Single layer graphene surface area 2630m2
Versarien Nanene surface area 45m2

2630/45 = 58 layers

Welcome to check the calculation on SG1 posts 43891



.

[spid81] 03/12/2018 08:54

Hi Superg1

Can you please substantiate all of these claims ?

Edit

Even the Graphene Council corrected Mike Brenner's tweet regarding the FGR sales agreement,


The Graphene Council
‏

@GrapheneCouncil
Follow Follow @GrapheneCouncil
More
Replying to @MikeWBrenner
This does not diminish the importance of this order. The fact that it is a draw down on the pull through of the end sales also implies there is the upside of greater than forecast demand. The really good news is that this is production that is going into an industrial application


Mike then TU the Graphene Councils reply, along with Dr Tina Bass

Mike also followed up the following reply

Mike Brenner
‏

@MikeWBrenner
Nov 29
More
Replying to @GrapheneCouncil

Hence I wish them luck as it grows the market but for new investors they should read the detail to understand the risks ... these are not sales orders in the bag!