Showing posts with label Nano Stocks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nano Stocks. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Nano analyst's quantum leap

How many nanotech analysts can dance on the head of a pin? God only knows. But it appears there are a limited number in the mortal world. John Roy going to Global Crown Capital essentially shuts down all nano analysis (PDF) at his old company, WR Hambrecht & Co.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Nanotech Stocks: Newton's Third Law Edition

Followup to this post (same fine print applies).

This ain't a stock chart. Around these Midwestern parts this summer, you have to be at least 52 inches tall to ride and it's called (appropriately enough) the Maverick.

Attention investors: Raise your arms, let out a yell and try to smile for the camera on the way down!

Monday, June 11, 2007

Monday, May 28, 2007

QuoteBot: Nanotech's 'gullible simpletons'

"Nanotechnologies is a fancy name that excites millions of gullible simpletons who believe there's a Golconda behind every rinky-dink, small company in the nano-business."


Malcolm Berko, financial adviser
Advising a reader in his syndicated column: Don't waste nanosecond on Altair


Backgrounder
Arrowhead Research Corp. stock is airborne
QuoteBot: Mad Nano Money
TINY, Yahoo and Yaweh
Cramer not mad about Headwaters

Friday, May 18, 2007

Arrowhead Research Corp. stock is airborne

Um, has anybody noticed what's been going on with Arrowhead Research Corp.'s stock price? *

* Howard Lovy's NanoBot takes no responsibility for any financial action you may or may not take based on anything you read here. If I were such a financial genius I'd have minions do the blogging for me, and I'd actually know how to make money off of NanoBot. Oh, and full disclosure: I did some work for Arrowhead Research Corp. last year and I have a few pennies invested in the company now. But I have no "inside" knowledge of the company. Hell, they won't even return my e-mails.

Related News
Arrowhead to Sell Restricted Stock
Arrowhead Announces $16.5 Million Investment by Institutional Investors
Form 8-K for Arrowhead Research Corp.

Backgrounder
My other life as a nanotech pitchman

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Cramer not mad about Headwaters

cramerhead
cramerhead3
CNBC's Jim Cramer is "in a flummox," so the "Mad Money" magnate turned to Headwaters Inc. CEO Kirk Bensen for some unflummoxing. Headwaters does many things, among them is a better (nano) way of making catalysts that cuts down on waste and makes coal-to-gas technology more efficient. (I explained the technology in more detail here.)

"What the heck are all these alternative energy companies doing at a 52-week low?," asks Cramer in this video clip. A comparatively mild-mannered Bensen gave an honest answer that just did not satisfy "C."

So, the verdict: "Don't buy, Don't buy." "Damn that's tough," Cramer says. "I wanted that one to be a good one."


Backgrounder
Philippines to launch NanoPower Revolution
Philippines to launch NanoPower Revolution: Part II
Headwaters Inc. makes nano waves

Saturday, May 27, 2006

QuoteBot: Mad Nano Money

madmoney"You're not going to look for a good nanotech company. You're going to look for the least bad one. Science that sounds just legitimate enough to get the crowd behind it. Once you're in, if you're right, the soon-to-be-hot sector will start getting coverage. Brokers will promote this garbage, then it will soar."


Jim Cramer, host of CNBC's "Mad Money"
Quoted in TheStreet.com

Backgrounder
TINY, Yahoo and Yaweh
Danville and the 'Valley of Death'
Wall Street Gang vs. Green Gang

Tuesday, January 25, 2005

Nantero sings a happy tune


nantero

PhysOrg.com is reporting a new deal between Brewer Science and Nantero to commercialize carbon nanotubes for nonvolatile memory in one more partnership in the traditional CMOS supply chain. It's part of Nantero's effort to remain all respectable and integrate with existing processes and products. You wouldn't want to frighten the semiconductor industry with news of its impending obsolescence. Dogs would lie down with cats and there would be panic in the streets.

As I wrote in a report for NanoMarkets last year, Nantero "has gone out of its way to make it clear that (it's) not some “crazy” nano company out to change everything by creating a manufacturing process that nobody else could reproduce. (CEO Greg) Schmergel’s marching orders to his people were that they were not to buy any 'weird equipment.'" The strategy works, of course, since Nantero has attracted some big venture capital bucks.

What's all the fuss about with Nantero? What the Boston-area company has laid claim to is its own first letter to add to RAM, and for some reason the letter N hadn't already been taken. So, NRAM it was, and here's how the nanotubes turn into memories: Suspend billions of nanotubes over a substrate that also contains tubes, then sound the call to prayer by flipping an electrical switch. The tubes on top bend in supplication toward the tubes on the bottom. And when they touch, they stay touched, even when the juice is turned off. Thank Mr. Van der Waals and his forces for that.

Why is this method of memory considered so great? It's because the tubes are, well, "nano," you can pack billions of them together, a kind of single-layer carpet of nanotubes upon nanotubes, and can be switched on and off in less than a nanosecond. And with Nantero's method, you don't have to worry about making all those billions of nanosoldiers line up correctly or even be the same size. The tubes are just scattered randomly, and regular semiconductor lithographic equipment will cut away the tubes that are not in the right place. Plus, we all know that nanotubes are strong and conduct better than Arthur Fiedler on the Fourth of July.

And according to Nantero, its process could theoretically conduct a memorable 10-gigabite symphony, a prototype of which has already been played. One potential problem, though, is that not all nanotubes were created equal. Some have different kinds of electrical properties that a random process just can't weave out – so there can be a few sour notes.

And still unanswered is how this data is read without eroding or destroying the information. The only explanation that's been given is that they're nanotubes, therefore incredibly strong and can't crack. That's never been truly put to the test, but I suppose it's safer to try it in computer memory than in a nanotube space elevator.

NanoBot Backgrounder
Revolutions happen to the unprepared
Memories, like the CMOS of my mind
Spintronics pioneer teaches online class

Friday, October 15, 2004

Playing hardball with nano pants


Finch

This just in from Josh Wolfe:
    All week long CNBC has been promoting a steel-cage "Nano Rematch". A rematch to what's become known as "stain-gate" -- when Nano-Tex's nano-enabled fabrics were deemed to not live up to the hype after Bullseye host Dylan Ratigan covered himself in mustard and coffee -- for the sake of product testing. Later today, the cable channel will have Olympic gold medalist Softball player, Jennie Finch, literally pitching assorted things at Nano-Tex fabrics! Will they hold up? What other "nano-gates" might be brewing?
Update: Spent the evening playing with my son and missed the show. Anybody out there see it? If so, give me an update in the comments section. Thanks.

NanoBot Backgrounder
Nanopants miss the Bullseye

Monday, September 20, 2004

Start the nano revolution without me


Nano Second (The New Republic)

    With the same bated breath that accompanied the early days of the dot-com era, commentators wrote that Nanosys would be the "first monster nanotech IPO," that "could launch an entirely new IPO wave."

    Then, suddenly, everything fell apart. Talk of a nanotech boom turned to talk of a nanotech bubble, with investors and commentators publicly expressing fear that the technology was much more hype than promise. In August, Nanosys withdrew its IPO, citing adverse market conditions, and the scene has been quiet ever since. The nanotech bubble, it seems, burst before it even inflated. What happened? And what does it mean for the nanotech industry? More here

NanoBot Backgrounder
Revolutions happen to the unprepared
IPO no-go
Initial Perilous Offering

Wednesday, August 04, 2004

IPO no-go


Some days, I feel like Jon Stewart delivering the news.

Today, a small startup company with no products, no clear timeline on when it will release products and has lost $25.8 million since its founding in 2001 decided not to go public, and blamed it on "adverse market conditions."

NanoBot Backgrounder
Initial Perilous Offering