Investment Opportunity?

[REWahoo]

Anyone see any investment opportunity here?

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/nano/2005-08-18-nanotube-breakthrough_x.htm

Nanotech researchers report big breakthrough

"In Friday's edition of the journal Science... scientists from the University of Texas and Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization report the creation of industry-ready sheets of materials made from nanotubes."

"•Self-supporting, transparent and stronger than steel or high-strength plastics, the sheets are flexible and can be heated to emit light.

• A square mile of the thinnest sheets, about 2-millionths-of-an-inch thick, would weigh only about 170 pounds.

• In lab tests, the sheets demonstrated solar cell capabilities, using sunlight to produce electricity.

The team has developed an automated process that produced 2 ¾-inch-wide strips of nanotubes at a rate of about 47 feet per minute...."

REW

 

[BUM]

"Atto"-boy REW,

A few (10?) years ago I visited the Cornell Nanofab Center. Impressive tour and capabilities even back then. The scales are becoming so small they can't been seen. We called it blind faith electronics because we could send a signal though a conductor that was too small to be seen.

Meet the new Marx Brothers... Nano, Pico, Femto, Atto, and just being born, Zepto!



http://www.azonano.com/news_old.asp?newsID=102




I'm hoping for a nanotube sheet beach umbrella for Christmas!

 

[Nords]

Anyone see any investment opportunity here?

Sure! It reminds me of the Internet in the '90s, gene therapy in the '80s, PCs in the '70s, rockets in the '60s, transistors in the '50s... and cars in 1905.

Which companies will be ruling the industry 10-20 years from now?

 

[sgeeeee]

. . .
Which companies will be ruling the industry 10-20 years from now?

And of course the answer is that they don't exist yet.

 

[REWahoo]

And of course the answer is that they don't exist yet.

Not so fast, SG. I just googled "Nanosoft" and got several hits... REW

 

[Nords]

And of course the answer is that they don't exist yet. 

Just imagine... somewhere in a lab a geeky kid is wandering around with Tang-stained fingers, high on a sugar buzz, annoying all the other researchers with his attitude, and figuring that someday he'll be the world's next richest man.

Let's give him all our money.

 

[sgeeeee]

Not so fast, SG.  I just googled "Nanosoft" and got several hits...   REW

But all these companies are formed to suck up the DARPA research money. Virtually none of them will make it the 10 or 20 years required to mature these ideas into product and profit -- if product ever actually results.

The nano craze is mostly a repackaging of micro-miniaturization efforts that have been occuring for the past 30 years. A few program managers at DARPA sold the idea and got tons of money to fund this kind of research. Suddenly every university and research facility in the country formed a Nano Lab of some sort. Of course these labs were staffed with the same researchers that were there before and they did the same thing they were doing before, but now they had the opportunity to get major research dollars for it. Spin off companies followed since professors and researchers saw a chance to get funding without having to pay the University's overhead rates. If there's enough real progress, other companies will form in several years that will be more likely to produce actual products.

But I won't hold my breath. Remember high temperature superconductors. late 1980's . . . lot's of exposure . . . big research dollars . . . unlimited applications . . .thousands of new companies formed . . . This is nearly a dead field today. That research went nowhere for a number of very good reasons. Research Funding agencies probably start 10 or 20 research fads for every one that ever pays off.

Time will tell.

 

[REWahoo]

But all these companies are formed to suck up the DARPA research money....

SG, I was not attempting to say "the" nanotech co. of the future already exists, just making a joke...."Nanosoft" >>> "Microsoft".

To quote 'ol Siggie Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." REW

 

[sgeeeee]

SG, I was not attempting to say "the" nanotech co. of the future already exists, just making a joke...."Nanosoft"  >>> "Microsoft". 

To quote 'ol Siggie Freud, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."     REW

My bad.

You posted a perfectly funny joke and I missed it. I just wasn't reading closely enough.

 

[REWahoo]

My bad.

You posted a perfectly funny joke and I missed it. I just wasn't reading closely enough.

Now you've got me thinking like Nords... REW

 

[TargaDave]

But all these companies are formed to suck up the DARPA research money. Virtually none of them will make it the 10 or 20 years required to mature these ideas into product and profit -- if product ever actually results.

But I won't hold my breath. Remember high temperature superconductors. late 1980's . . . lot's of exposure . . . big research dollars . . . unlimited applications . . .thousands of new companies formed . . . This is nearly a dead field today. That research went nowhere for a number of very good reasons.

Time will tell.

SG, I wouldn't be quite so harsh on the system although you're spot on with the buzzword packaging and overhype. HTSC was a bust although companies like American Superconductor are still scrimping along. Around the same time as HTSC, wide band gap semi's (SiC, GaN, etc) also got a lot of DOD funding and some really great products are emerging from that (Cree), so it's not all wasted. More than just Darpa money, Nano is the current buzzword to tap all that venture capital money sitting on the sidelines. A few years ago the buzzword was MEMS. From MEMS we got air bag actuators and DLP TV's. Next year a new buzz word will emerge. There will be plenty of carnage in Nano and MEMS but a few big winners will probably emerge from all the hype. A great place for VC money but for small investors IMHO it's non starter

 

[sgeeeee]

SG,  I wouldn't be quite so harsh on the system although you're spot on with the buzzword packaging and overhype.  HTSC was a bust although companies like American Superconductor are still scrimping along.  Around the same time as HTSC, wide band gap semi's (SiC, GaN, etc) also got a lot of DOD funding and some really great products are emerging from that (Cree), so it's not all wasted.  More than just Darpa money, Nano is the current buzzword to tap all that venture capital money sitting on the sidelines.  A few years ago the buzzword was MEMS. From MEMS we got air bag actuators and DLP TV's.  Next year a new buzz word will emerge.  There will be plenty of carnage in Nano and  MEMS  but a few big winners will probably emerge from all the hype.  A great place for VC money but for small investors IMHO it's non starter 

If I were a DARPA funding agent, I would be putting money into widebandgap semiconductors too. There are still lots of problems, but already a few important products and some huge potential in the area of LED lighting and high power, high frequency devices.

But MEMS is still far more hype than real. The airbag actuators were being manufactured before MEMS became a buzzword. Most of the promises of MEMS never materialized. Little or no progress is being made to eliminate the outstanding reliability and producibility problems.

 

[TargaDave]

But MEMS is still far more hype than real. The airbag actuators were being manufactured before MEMS became a buzzword. Most of the promises of MEMS never materialized. Little or no progress is being made to eliminate the outstanding reliability and producibility problems.

Have faith. The experience gained from getting it wrong 500 times can be invaluable!
Were (are) you in the high-tech materials-device field? What did (do) you do?

 

[Nords]

Have faith. The experience gained from getting it wrong 500 times can be invaluable!

We could go through a couple hundred nascent industries with the same conclusions, and my point is that these trends take about a generation-- literally 20-30 years-- for their benefits to be realized as common knowledge.

The only investors to benefit from being early to this game are VCs & angel investors like Paul Allen. And while his investments generate a lot of press releases I wonder if, like Donald Trump, they'd both be richer from putting their money into index funds. But that's not why they invest in these cool ideas...

 

[TargaDave]

The only investors to benefit from being early to this game are VCs & angel investors like Paul Allen. And while his investments generate a lot of press releases I wonder if, like Donald Trump, they'd both be richer from putting their money into index funds. But that's not why they invest in these cool ideas...

Exactly. Many limited partners in VC funds are wealthy company founders who went through the VC gauntlet to start with. Some also do angel investing almost as a hobby. The few modest ones I know put some of the pile in standard investments while some goes back into the poker game; keeps the excitement going without all the direct pain of starting another business, plus they can better afford to loose it. Something like 90% of VC backed companies ultimately go bust, but a couple of Google style grand slams makes up for it all. Not for the feint of heart