Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[evergreen8] 10/7/2019 12:35

To all those who see merit in engaging in this debate about VRS ability to produce commercial volumes of high quality product you might also like to discuss the suggestion that a B52 bomber crash site was found on the moon (really it was in the papers) or that Elvis is alive and well and lives in Doncaster.

Why are you dancing to the tune of these people who seek to undermine confidence with spurious questions aimed at the gullible and naive when the hard facts have already been established by Independent Certification of the highest possible credibility.

Just read the RNS on the subject (extract below) or visit the NGA or GEIC websites.

PS the other amazing thing was the news paper article that followed a few days later " B52 bomber vanishes from Moon" isn't that amazing - discuss.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Versarien plc (AIM: VRS), the advanced materials engineering group, is pleased to announce that the Company is the first graphene company in the world to successfully complete the Graphene Council's "Verified Graphene Producer" programme (the "Programme").

The US-based Graphene Council's Programme is an independent, third party verification system that involves a physical inspection of the production facilities, a review of the entire production process, a random sampling of product material and rigorous characterisation and testing by a leading, international materials laboratory. The Programme is based on the most recent developments in globally recognised graphene standards, surveys of graphene producers, researchers and users, as well as analysis of commercially available graphene products.



The Graphene Council have designed the Programme to be an important step in providing customers and end-users with a degree of confidence, that has not existed before, that they are sourcing material from a reputable supplier, bringing transparency and clarity to a rapidly changing and opaque market for graphene materials.



Terrance Barkan, Executive Director of The Graphene Council, commented: "Successful commercialisation of graphene materials requires not only the ability to produce graphene to a declared specification, but to be able to do so at a commercial scale. It is nearly impossible for a graphene customer to verify the type of material they are receiving without going through an expensive and time-consuming process of having sample materials fully characterised by a laboratory that has the equipment and expertise to test graphene.



"The Verified Graphene Producer programme developed by The Graphene Council provides a level of independent inspection and verification that is not available anywhere else.



"We are pleased to have worked with the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in the UK, regarded as one of the absolute top facilities for metrology and graphene characterisation in the world. They have provided outstanding analytical expertise for the materials testing portion of the Programme."



Neill Ricketts, CEO of Versarien, commented: "We are delighted that Versarien is the first graphene producer in the world to successfully complete the Graphene Council's Verified Graphene Producer programme.

"This is a huge validation of our technology and will enable our partners and potential customers to have confidence that the graphene we produce meets globally accepted standards.

"There are many companies that claim to be graphene producers, but to enjoy the benefits that this material can deliver requires high quality, consistent product to be supplied. The Verified Producer programme is designed to verify that our production facilities, processes and tested material meet the stringent requirements laid down by the Graphene Council.

[markyboy5] 10/7/2019 12:32

Didn’t Neill say that it would take a couple of days to produce 12kg

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 12:15

ashehzi,

I have survived a few ups and downs, the downs mostly in connection with my investments in AIM shares. I ask so many questions because I have heard so much BS from AIM companies in the past. I may have been around a while but do not claim to be an expert investor. Why would I spend time on here if I was?
I am in VRS because of the potential to make some money! I believe VRS can produce good quality graphene and that good and consistent quality will be in demand.
My main concern is around delivery at scale at an acceptable price. The University of Ulster patent was quite uninspiring and contained a single example using 50mg of graphite input. I should try and go on one of the lab visits to check out production for myself, do they show the 3T machine or is that hidden away? I suspect the 12kg order of GNP-HP has stretched VRS and although Neill made it sound easy, I don't suspect they could produce at full capacity 24/7. Blending it into polymer before dispatch helps with transportation but this won't always be feasible. The links with China should help on the demand side and the cost of production.
I also worry about competition. I don't think the graphene council verification is as big a deal as some make out. Neill said customers weren't that bothered about ISO standards when that was a hot topic a while back and customers will build up relationships with graphene producers that ought to ensure consistent good quality supply. The ACS materials website is one example of that, it looks very impressive. Other companies with far more people and resources than VRS are looking at new battery materials, etc.
I am looking forward to the results and an update on collaborations hopefully in the next couple of weeks.

[chumbo] 10/7/2019 11:51

I thought that we had received assurance that the process delivers a high yield anyway?

[johnveals] 10/7/2019 11:37

I wouldn’t put too much store in what it says in the patents.

Again, NR has stated that when talking to global companies they need to be confident you can deliver what you say you can, otherwise you are shown the door very quickly.

It is still early days but the direction of travel remains positive.

[1teepee] 10/7/2019 11:27

He probably dhor:) read the rns's and listened to podcasts. Also probably researched what Graphene is and it's benefits

[ashehzi] 10/7/2019 11:21

DaveMac3, you're member since 2000 and I assume you survived many bear markets and corrections and still in profits. You're senior member and if you're invested in VRS, please share with us minions your reasons and also what risks do you see going ahead? Please enlighten us. Thanks.

[pshevlin] 10/7/2019 11:18

DM3...I'll believe you but you seem quite happy touting ACS when we have absolutely no independently verified data for their claims and strangely, though they are in the USA, are not the goto company for oilies or AECOM.

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 11:09

pshevlin,

you might not believe me but I am invested here just not one of the happy clappy brigade.

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 11:03

pshevlin, I thought I asked the right person in superg but he didn't answer. Filter me if you like I won't stop questioning. BTW have you read the process patent?

[pshevlin] 10/7/2019 10:50

DM3..loads of not so subtle putdowns of VRS and their technology.Go away or just start asking the right people the questions. Much more and you are filtered.

[tim3416] 10/7/2019 10:49

Dave, I wouldn't expect Neill to provide the depth of information you seem to want to hear and I agree no one on here would know either. We are still at the stage based on what we know, where you either believe VRS will be as successful as most on here think or you don't. So far we have nothing to suggest that won't happen just things are taking a bit longer than some hoped.

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 10:44

Factories full of machines in China may be the answer but the process described in the patent appears to be very inefficient so hopefully improvements have been made.

[chumbo] 10/7/2019 10:43

mikeb - a belated thank you for your response yesterday re exporting from the UK vs local manufacture. So I think the answer is it probably could be done in volume if needed but not ideal as it might need relatively expensive packaging in smaller lot sizes to avoid agglomeration. However, I imagine the price would hopefully carry it if needs must and it might solve a problem for certain customers/situations.


I wonder what piece of granulation kit would be needed at the customer end if we wanted to send bulk bags of Nanene to Australia and de-agglomerate it at the point of use. I'm sure there's a simple answer (eg: the kit doesn't exist or deagglomeration reduces lateral size) or we wouldn't necessarily be looking to produce Nanene local to users and spreading our manufacturing IP around the globe.

[johnveals] 10/7/2019 10:42

I would also add that NR has consistently stated that each collaboration begins with a cost benefit analysis before proceeding.

[johnveals] 10/7/2019 10:36

DM3 - Posts crossed. No one is suggesting there has been an order close to 1 tonne but what we do know is there is a machine that can produce up to 3 tonnes of graphene per year and that machine has been verified by the Graphene Council.

The first weaving loom was probably considered an expensive way to produce cloth but soon after there were mills full of them all over the land creating vast wealth.

[johnveals] 10/7/2019 10:30

DM3 - Whilst there might be a case for verifying (I assume you mean characterising) a specific graphene batch before use in a critical application, to do that for every batch would require complicated laboratory equipment and be very expensive.

Hence the reason for the verified graphene producer moniker.

And who is currently the only verified graphene producer in the world?

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 10:29

Tim, I have tried on a couple of occasions and only received vague responses so I guess he doesn't want to divulge that information - fair enough. This means nobody on here knows either.

Having a closer look at the process patent, it looks like the yield was about 20% at best when the patent was published. That patent is also a bit vague about the precise conditions and the method is only described on a 50mg scale to produce I guess 10mg of Nanene and uses more than 1L of DMF (not a green solvent) for that scale!

I am not questioning that VRS produce quality graphene but I am convinced they have not had a large order for Nanene or similar, say 1 tonne, because they can't make that quantity at an acceptable cost.

[rovi70] 10/7/2019 10:14

SDSC’s Comet Supercomputer Used to Model Graphene-Water Interaction
hxxps://www.sdsc.edu/News%20It…/PR20190709_graphene_h2o.html
@versarien @2DTECH #graphene #2dmaterials #hydrophobic #drugdelivery #medicine #biomedical #nanodevices

[tim3416] 10/7/2019 10:13

Hey davemac did you email Neill your question yesterday that was causing you so much concern?

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 10:10

I am sure many of their customers have the capability to verify the graphene they buy before use.

[dgduncan] 10/7/2019 10:04

DM3 - I am sure it would be more if they were verified by the Graphene Council.

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 10:01

ACS also make this bold claim

We are rapidly outpacing other graphene manufacturers and graphene material suppliers in all things relating to graphene; for quality, consistency, purity, and innovation, no graphene production companies even come close to ACS.

[davemac3] 10/7/2019 09:59

dgduncan, that's for single layer, nanoplatelets are cheaper depending on grade.

[1teepee] 10/7/2019 09:49

I knew all about Graphene anyway as I am interested in future tech and only got into stocks a year ago. Read 15 books and jumped into a long term position with versarien