Fraud, party of one?

One more promoter canard showed up today for the first time in a while. It's the "innocence by association" argument, that if REFR is in fact committing a fraud of some kind, then all their licensees, including several big name corporations, must be party to this fraud. Thus, if you question REFR's integrity, you likewise question the integrity of GE, Hitachi, DuPont, Air Products, etc.

This is, of course, absurd. The relationship REFR has with these large companies, while technically one of licensor-licensee, is in reality more like customer-supplier. REFR needs manufacturing capacity to produce SPD film, and the large companies are willing to lend it to them. (The fact that, so far, all this capacity has gone unused, is another issue and another post.) As long as the large companies have clear direction on how to make the film, that is all they really need to know. As hard as the promoters attempt to make the claim to the contrary, none of this constitutes any endorsement of the product, the technology, or REFR as an investment.

REFR investors should (read: don't) ask themselves, if REFR should happen to fail to achieve a revenue stream, fail to achieve new financing, and, as a result, fail as a company sometime next year, will that be DuPont's fault? Will they sue Hitachi for misleading them? Will they demand Jack Welch be thrown in prison for GE's complicity in the scam? Of course not. (Indeed, if anyone, they'll go after the shorts and those who warned them about REFR all along. That bit of psychosis is another post topic.)

To say that the supplier-licensees are a "party" to any of REFR's failures is like saying the power plants were a party to the Enron scandal for selling their energy to them. Utterly ridiculous. Much like everything else REFR.