Does Energous (WATT) have momentum despite it not being released in the Apple Iphone7?Geez, WATT going back up in price vs what we all expected after NO Iphone7 inclusion? Do other investors know something that we ”Gummers” do not? I love and have studied Nikola Tesla’s work and this is the real deal and I think enough other folks see the true future value in this new ”disruptive technology” and that is keeping the price high. I plan to buy in as soon as more funds are available for a long term hold……………………….any opinions out there?
This is a discussion topic or guest posting submitted by a Stock Gumshoe reader. The content has not been edited or reviewed by Stock Gumshoe, and any opinions expressed are those of the author alone.
I tend to agree. I think the potential is huge and definitely disruptive. I can see Energous getting gobbled up by one of the tech titans though, if for no other reason than to keep the tech contained. It will be curious to see if they manage to hold out and build a commodity tech company out there like QUALCOMM managed to do years ago.
It definitely has momentum. But I think it is garbage. The promise of their wireless charging tech is that you can walk into a room, restaurant or bar and your phone will start charging. If they could do that, I think every restaurant in the developed world would buy their charger. But the truth is, WATT is nowhere near that technology. Not only is wireless charging slower than wired, but your phone has to be nearly touching the wireless charger to work. If your phone is even a few inches away, it will not charge. I bought the Sept 17.50 put for $1.31 and profited handsomely. I plan to get short again when it looks like the time is right.
Can we get Travis to take a look at Oxford’s teaser on the stock from Trump’s portfolio with a PE between 7 and 8 and massive YOY growth and FCF?
First, I have to comment on traydon’s reply. You obviously do not have a technical background. This is not garbage tech and I’ll get to that when I address the original post. Yes, every restaurant, business, train, airplane, subway, etc. would invest in the RF transmitters – many per place if the limitation stays at 15 feet , or a circumference of 30 feet – just like most places offer free WiFi. They WANT their establishments to provide services that get customers to choose them and keep them coming back. Starbucks didn’t get so popular just because of their coffee. So think about the massive ammount of profit that will come from selling those millions of transmitters not to mention the licensing fees to every device maker of smart phones, watches, Fitbits, hearing aids and the industry of wearable tech. If Apple did license the tech and Energous charged 20-30 cents per device – a drop in the bucket for a $00 phone – the stock would be worth around $90 per share.
And your reference to current so called wireless charging where the device either has physically be touching the charging pad or be very close is because it uses inductive tech and that is how it has to be to work. Also, how do you know Energous tech would be slow wen charging devices?
In response to the original post – and traylon listen up here – I was just working on a BLOG post and part of it was going to be dedicated to Tesla, the King of RF – traylon, RF means Radio Frequency. Tesla was trying to do the same thing when he built his lab and campus in Denver. He believed he could deliver cheap, wireless electricity and some think he almost succeeded. The account of what happened there is interesting. Tesla was certifiably insane but he was also the Da Vinci of RF and frequency tech. Taylon, this is for you. Tesla invented the radio – not Marconi and that was declared the truth in court. There was Tesla’s coil, cool to look at but no practical use. Tesla invented AC or alternating current. You know, that stuff that comes into your house every day. Edison fought with him saying DC, direct current, was the the future. Edison lost. Tesla died poor and penniless in a flophouse room, mainly because he was more interested in the tech than money. He had a very lucrative contract with Westinghouse but when they question some of his ideas he went into Westinghouse’s office and tore up the contract if Westinghouse would just go along with his ideas. I told you, he was insane. When he died the US government swooped in and confiscated ALL of his drawings and papers and they haven’t been seen since. So, if Tesla – with the technology available in pre-1943 – thought RF signals could deliver wireless power how much of a stretch is it to believe that finally it can be done?
Power transmission through the air is certainly possible and has been done a few ways over the years since Tesla — the questions are more about efficiency, cost and safety. And practicality, if you’re talking about one company becoming a ubiquitous provider. My concern about WATT is not that the tech is impossible, it has more to do with the disconnect between practical reality and the promotional blather about the stock’s potential.