IS IT TRUE: March 22, 2012

IS IT TRUE that the first paragraph in a market validation primer on investing in technology based businesses distributed to universities with tech transfer programs reads as follows;
“Moving technology from the lab to the market is a costly process, and determining which innovations to support with your limited resources is arguably the most critical task for your TTO. Make your investment decisions wisely, and your return on those budget dollars can bring years of financial rewards. But backing technologies that never make it past the drawing board can leave you with poor returns as well as lost confidence among administrators, faculty, and other key stakeholders. That’s why understanding the dynamics of the target market and the target buyer or licensee are vital elements of every assessment.”?

IS IT TRUE that it seems as though there are at least a few people on the Evansville City Council who are taking the verify first approach with respect to supporting a loan from the City of Evansville to Earthcare Energy?…that the document claimed by Earthcare to be a DOD document is not a DOD document at all?…that the Earthcare claims that this document that was subcontracted to a private non-profit to write did seem to verify a potential to harness some lost energy but explicitly recommended a series of tests to verify that the Earthcare proposal was feasible under real world conditions?…that Earthcare Energy has stated in its “Investment Summary” that this testing will be completed by the end of March which is now only 9 days away?…that to make an affirmative decision to make this loan before a third party test of the technical solution has been issued will take the prize of the decade for taking an unnecessary risk with the people of Evansville’s money?…that taking such a risk will be exactly 6 times more risky that anything that the Weinzapfel Administration did down at the McCurdy or with the hotel that never happened?

IS IT TRUE that the “Investment Summary” while being a decent start at a business plan fails to address the potential for future competition and to delineate the non-existing barriers to entering this market with a different solution?…that the “Investment Summary” calls for the sale of $10 Million of stock and taking on debt of $34 Million before reaching the 38th month that is called for as the first breakeven point?…that in terms of business plans this one has been released quite prematurely and as a private placement memorandum (private stock sale required document) it is not even a decent start?…that Earthcare may someday have a proven prototype, a comprehensive business plan, and a real PPM, but right now the people of Evansville have not been shown any of those things?…that until these things are made public the Evansville City Council should defer this vote and if these things take more than 60 days to complete the Council should forget about this and find another contestant in their game of municipal SHARK TANK?

IS IT TRUE that one of the things that has to be in a PPM is a form to be filled out that every investor states that they are an “ACCREDITED INVESTOR”?…that this is government speak that means either “I earn at least $200,000 per year OR have a net worth of $1 Million excluding my personal residence”?…that some of the people who have recommended that the City of Evansville loan $5 Million to a start-up that has yet to show that their technology is proven meet the criteria to be an “ACCREDITED INVESTOR”?…that we wonder if any of these “ACCREDITED INVESTORS” have subscribed to any of the shares that Earthcare Energy is proposing to sell during their first year of operation?…that it would speak volumes about their real belief and confidence in this company if the entire $10 Million private offering were being purchased by local people of wealth who have been pushing the City of Evansville to be a bank?…that no one will ever confuse the Evansville City Council with the Silicon Valley Bank?…that one of these places has the experience and knowledge in place to make decisions with respect to start-ups and the other unfortunately does not?…that maybe a loan committee should be formed to evaluate whatever “loan application” that Earthcare may have submitted to GAGE?