Yes customer psychology can be strange, but the best marketing will not sell a "perpetuum stabile" - or if you wish it in German a clock "ohne Mechanismus" The E-cat is not an energy source yet. Punktum!
Peter On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Peter Heckert <[email protected]>wrote: > I know customers. > > with complicated products it quite often happens, that they complain even > when everything is fine ;-) > Hope, he is prepared for this. > > It also happens that customers fanatically believe in products and are > totally happy, but the product doesnt work at all. > Look here, these companies have satisfied customers for 20 years now, but > the products dont do anything: > > http://www.aquapol-deutschland.de/ (drying of buildings with zeropoint > energy - no other power) > http://www.ecojet.com/ (Increasing efficiency of oil and gas burners with > magnets) > > Of course they have also unsatisfied customers and for these they have good > lawyers ;-) > > > > Am 16.10.2011 18:16, schrieb Peter Gluck: > > > > Today this message was published on Rossi's Blog. > > Andrea Rossi > October 16th, 2011 at 2:14 > AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=22#comment-97993> > > Dear Giovanni: > We will run also in self sustained mode, the periods will depend on many > factors. In any case, the power output will be 6 times the power input. > About the snakes: the time of the snakes is over. The start up of the 1 MW > plant is the end of the mental masturbations of enviuos, wannabe theorists, > lecturers of calorimetry and engineering. Now LENR goes to the market. The > test will not be made by me, but by the Customers’ consultants. Time of > chatters is over. Maybe the test will not be good, maybe: it will be the > first time I will start up a plant of that dimension, but in this case the > problem will be the Customer, not the bunch of imbeciles that instead of > understanding that we actually made LENR a reality lose their time digging > holes on the surface the water in the middle of the ocean to find the wine. > And in the case this test will go not well, we will learn and remake > another, and another, and another, but, be sure, we will arrive to the > target. At any cost. > Warm Regards, > A.R. > > Well written. On the negative side the finale "at any cost" is > frightening. Pereat mundus, fiat E-cattus! Who will pay these costs? > Obviously the Customer.- an ideal one. > On the positive side I like the use of the metaphor of the digging a hole > of the Ocean for finding wine despite the fact that it does not describe > well the activity of those mentally impaired persons who are not 120% E-cat > enthusiasts. > > Till now the triumph of the 1MW demo was an certainty, now it seems that > due to the sabotage of some imbeciles > using autodestructive however cheap sexual practices, > the !MW setup has lost its technological perfection. Hopefully new details > will be known, I am too limited in thinking to see the correlation. > > The idea that there can be some problems with the Demo has appeared > yesterday. Today http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kkxbw3s2pM we get a > message saying "No more tests!" > > http://ecatnow.com/ecat-news/ecat/no-more-tests-except-for-an-e-cat-home-test-let-the-customers/ > > I have tried to send a comment, but I fear it will not be published. Here > it is: > > "*The message is not very clear- no more tests before the ! MW demo of > Oct 28? > > No more tests at all? > > A sellable product most have a specification, instruction of use, must be > authorized > by some expert bureaucratic organizations, must have a guarantee- safety, > performances and so on… > > You cannot sell an :”E-cat in the sack.”- the title of one of my essays re > this subject. > Rossi seemed to be enchanted with the October 6 test and all the questions > re measurements were considered malevolent nit-picking. > > How does correlate this decision with some statements of Rossi that some > troubles can appear at the triumphal 1 MW test? > > The great questions is: what is more dangerously immature- this mode of > management or the > E-cat itself?" > * > > Let me add again and again that 6 thermal energy units for 1 energy unit is > a modest less that 2 $ for 1 $ if we ignore investment and some other > expenses. > > Evviva il Customer! > > Peter > > > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
