EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Products => Crowd Funded Projects => Topic started by: PeterL on June 03, 2015, 08:16:32 pm
-
Link:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2928997/batteriser-is-a-250-gadget-that-extends-disposable-battery-life-by-800-percent.html (http://www.pcworld.com/article/2928997/batteriser-is-a-250-gadget-that-extends-disposable-battery-life-by-800-percent.html)
also a popular dutch news site here:
http://www.nu.nl/gadgets/4061033/gadget-van-2-euro-verlengt-levensduur-batterij-met-800-procent.html (http://www.nu.nl/gadgets/4061033/gadget-van-2-euro-verlengt-levensduur-batterij-met-800-procent.html)
Catchwords:
-industrial espionage (with a picture of a busted-in office door!)
-Silicon Valley
-Ph.D. in electrical engineering
-VP stint at Broadcom and a CEO stint at FlexPower
-patent
-below 1.35 or even 1.4 volts
-prove it’s not snake oil
-saving the planet
-15 billion batteries
-Indiegogo (end of june)
Bonus quotes:
physics department of San Jose State University by Dr. Kiumars Parvin:
“We tested the Batteriser sleeve in our lab and we confirmed that the Batteriser taps into 80 percent of energy that is usually thrown away,”
ex-CTO of Energizer:
`.... we’re chemical engineers, and we weren’t thinking about power management.’
So, it must be true!
-
"Batteriser taps into 80 percent of energy that is usually thrown away,”
Isn't that what the guys with the iPhone sleeve that recharges the phone's battery using the emitted radio signal claimed too? "Uses wasted energy!".
WTF is going on with these kooks recently ...
EDIT: That thing is nothing else but a Joule Thief. It boosts the voltage of the cell so that the connected device doesn't shut down prematurely when it detects dead cell.
Oh and I love that "test" with the bluetooth receiver - of course that thing will report a "full battery" because it measures only voltage. The question is how long it will actually manage to run on that - and they didn't measure that. They cannot get around the battery discharge curve. If they calculate the "savings" by declaring the battery "dead" at 1.4 volts, well, no wonder they can get to those 80%. Wonderful example of moving the goalposts conveniently.
I believe that what they have built is actually legit - there isn't anything special about a miniature boost converter. What isn't kosher is the breathless reporting by clueless journos and their marketing ...
-
Topic already started on June 2 ...
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/'batterizer'-claims-to-increase-disposable-battery-life-8x/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/'batterizer'-claims-to-increase-disposable-battery-life-8x/)
-
... What isn't kosher is the breathless reporting by clueless journos ...
That's exactly what bothered me about this, in more than one way.
Topic already started on June 2 ...
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/'batterizer'-claims-to-increase-disposable-battery-life-8x/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/'batterizer'-claims-to-increase-disposable-battery-life-8x/)
Oh sorry I missed that, let's close this thread then.
-
This BS is now on IGG raised $72K in 22h.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/batteriser-extend-battery-life-by-up-to-8x/x/10280792#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/batteriser-extend-battery-life-by-up-to-8x/x/10280792#/story)
-
There's an article on yahoo and even mentions Dave's video about it and response from the "CEO". https://www.yahoo.com/makers/breakthrough-battery-gadget-answers-critics-125063020800.html (https://www.yahoo.com/makers/breakthrough-battery-gadget-answers-critics-125063020800.html)
-
So, they are going after the rechargeable battery market as well now:
Bob Roohparvar
16 hours ago
@jllobet
We are in the process of completing our customized IC (Integrated Circuit) design for Rechargeables. After receiving the IC from the fab and testing it we can introduce the new Batteriser for Rechargeables.
We do not recommend using the current Batteriser with Rechargeables.
The reason for this is the current Batteriser will discharge the rechargeable batteries too low which can reduce their charge retention.
The Rechargeable version (coming soon) of Batteriser will address the issue.
-
I challenged them on their Apple Keyboard video to produce a single commercial device that will demonstrate their 800% more life claim. Let's see if they bite. [Or how long till they censor my comment away]
https://youtu.be/NF4zjWynjEo
-
I challenged them on their Apple Keyboard video to produce a single commercial device that will demonstrate their 800% more life claim. Let's see if they bite. [Or how long till they censor my comment away]
I don't see any challenging comment, so not long at all.
-
You may have missed the final phrase in the video repeating twice: "one hundred percent"
So first, how is it magically 13% remaining power becomes 100% new power.
Second, assuming first question answered, it is 100% for shit sake, not 800%. False advertising!
;D
-
You may have missed the final phrase in the video repeating twice: "one hundred percent"
So first, how is it magically 13% remaining power becomes 100% new power.
Second, assuming first question answered, it is 100% for shit sake, not 800%. False advertising!
;D
100% / 13% ~= 8x
It's a completely misleading "test" though. The battery level indicator uses the battery voltage to estimate the remaining capacity. As soon as you introduce a device to modify the voltage being measured, the indicated battery level becomes absolutely meaningless. Sure it reads 100%, and it will continue to read 100% until it suddenly and inexplicably dies (probably around the same time that it would have died anyway...). The batteriser will do a GREAT job of rendering the battery level indicator on every single device it's installed in completely useless.
A REAL test would be to put brand new batteries in a keyboard, run some kind of benchmarking test until the keyboard dies, and measure how long it took. Then restart it - take new batteries, put them in a batteriser, run the same benchmarking test until the keyboard dies, and compare the run time to the first test. Then repeat each of those tests a handful of times to get a nice average. If the runtime with the batteriser is 8x longer than without, I'll eat my words, but it won't be. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it even hurts the run time due to switching losses, since I assume the Apple keyboard already has a DC/DC converter inside that's designed to extract a significant amount of the battery capacity, in which case adding the batteriser just doubles the switching losses and runs the battery out faster. I suspect this will be the case with most other consumer devices as well.
I also suspect that they KNOW this, and the fact that they haven't provided ANY measurements for ANY devices shows that they have nothing good to report, and they're bringing it to market anyway. The fact that they have to resort to false advertising (battery level indicator showing 100% on a depleted battery) is VERY telling of the lack of confidence they have in their product. If they had something real, they would show it, instead of resorting to deception.
-
These clowns have raised almost $125K on indigogo as I type this.
I'm bothered that none of the writers that hyped this project have bothered to print any followups suggesting that batteroo's claims may be dubious. What really bugs me though is charlatans like these guys will destroy the crowd funding model.
I wrote a complaint to Indigogo, but got back a stock reply email (i.e. we'll investigate, but we can't let you know what we've found).
-
You may have missed the final phrase in the video repeating twice: "one hundred percent"
So first, how is it magically 13% remaining power becomes 100% new power.
Second, assuming first question answered, it is 100% for shit sake, not 800%. False advertising!
;D
100% / 13% ~= 8x
The point was once you took a bite off a donut it is not a whole donut anymore, no matter how you look at the donut. One would not eat a 1/8 of a donut and get 8 times more calories.
-
You may have missed the final phrase in the video repeating twice: "one hundred percent"
So first, how is it magically 13% remaining power becomes 100% new power.
Second, assuming first question answered, it is 100% for shit sake, not 800%. False advertising!
;D
100% / 13% ~= 8x
The point was once you took a bite off a donut it is not a whole donut anymore, no matter how you look at the donut. One would not eat a 1/8 of a donut and get 8 times more calories.
Indeed, if the battery level with the Batteriser would show 87% instead of 100%, it would have appeared plausible.
-
I challenged them on their Apple Keyboard video to produce a single commercial device that will demonstrate their 800% more life claim. Let's see if they bite. [Or how long till they censor my comment away]
I don't see any challenging comment, so not long at all.
Interesting. When I look while logged in, I can still see the comment, but when I look while not logged in to my account, the comment is not there.
Anyway, this is what I wrote:
Of course it'll display 100%, you've boosted the voltage, you've effectively disabled the battery monitor, it will now display 100% until it dies. The reason for this is the battery monitor bases remaining capacity on the voltage of the batteries [under load]. Your boost supply that you strap on, will effectively disable this, as it will now always be presenting 1.5V/cell at the terminal [ie a full battery].
Show a test of something actually operating for a longer period, as in the end it all comes down to how much energy is in the battery. In fact I challenge you to produce a commercial product that will demonstrate your 800% more life claim.
I commented on the "monkey" videos too, that one has also disappeared.
Curious, you compared the open-circuit voltage [no load] of the batteries to the under-load voltage of the power supply [PSU]. This is completely meaningless, as once you applied load to those batteries, the terminal voltage dropped. [which you state in the video, but fail to demonstrate in your "proof"] Now if you showed the voltage (under-load) of the batteries you would have made a valid comparison. However, had you done so, you would have confirmed what the PSU was showing, the device stops working at around 0.9V. [in fact it's likely that those batteries dropped well below 0.9V once loaded]. Please repeat your proof with the batteries in an external holder, and then place voltage a voltage meter across the pack, and a current meter between the pack and the load to show how it compares to what the PSU was showing.
The no-load voltage of a battery is a relatively meaningless measurement, as it can only tell you roughly the state of the cell, but gives no indication of how much actual energy remains, and carries no relationship to the terminal voltage when the cell is under load.
Yes a PSU will maintain the set voltage, while delivering as much current as the device needs [provided that the PSU has not reached the current limit set-point], whereas a battery will drop in voltage, as the load demands increase. But that's the point here... the voltage has dropped, so the two are no longer equal... one simply has to lower the PSU voltage to emulate this. Thus, by slowly decreasing the voltage on the power supply, you can find that terminal voltage point [under load] at which the device fails. This point will be the same regardless of what the power source is.
Bottom line... Testing with a PSU is completely valid, as all that matters from the devices perspective is the terminal voltage under load. A PSU will faithfully work in doing this, in fact it makes this process much easier, as it maintains that state, whereas a battery could drop off very rapidly, making it hard to determine the actual failure point.
-
Interesting. When I look while logged in, I can still see the comment, but when I look while not logged in to my account, the comment is not there.
Wow! So, if someone deletes a Youtube comment I made*, I may not even notice it because it still shows up for me (when logged in)? Sneaky! I can understand why they (Youtube) might do that, but that may also explain the horrendous level of Youtube comments. Maybe some of the commenters would think twice about what they are writing if they saw that a lot of their comments were deleted? But who am I kidding - probably not!
[*I think the number of comments I ever made on Youtube can be counted on a single hand.]
-
Perhaps not deleted, but left in moderation limbo, so it remains, but is not publicly visible.
They did seem to respond to it though [and likely to others which I can't see, though one has seemed to become visible.
The entire purpose of the video was to show that Batteries are not power supplies... The main point that was brought to everyone's' attention is the existence of internal resistance that had been omitted in some of the blogs. There was an attempt to get people to look at the ESR which plays a major role in battery operation and makes the battery to be different from a power supply.
The whole point of the video was to show that battery voltage under load (closed circuit voltage) is very different from the unload (open circuit voltage)...
To which I replied:
Please read my previous comment again. The ESR of the battery is IRRELEVANT when evaluating the dropout voltage of a device, as all that matters is the TERMINAL VOLTAGE, which a PSU is perfectly capable of providing. The ESR is relevant when when evaluating the performance of a battery, but that's a different test altogether.
+Batteriser Batteroo said: "The whole point of the video was to show that battery voltage under load (closed circuit voltage) is very different from the unload (open circuit voltage)..." But that's NOT what you showed, or stated in the video. Your whole point was to try and make it look like a PSU was not a proper device for testing the dropout voltage of a device. If what you said here was the whole point, you would have shown the voltage of the battery open circuit and under load, in comparison to that of the power supply.
-
Interesting. When I look while logged in, I can still see the comment, but when I look while not logged in to my account, the comment is not there.
Wow! So, if someone deletes a Youtube comment I made*, I may not even notice it because it still shows up for me (when logged in)? Sneaky! I can understand why they (Youtube) might do that, but that may also explain the horrendous level of Youtube comments. Maybe some of the commenters would think twice about what they are writing if they saw that a lot of their comments were deleted? But who am I kidding - probably not!
[*I think the number of comments I ever made on Youtube can be counted on a single hand.]
Normally it's not deleted, if you logged in your comments have a higher ranking for you and it shows up on top, if you are not logged in you have to switch the comment ordering from "Top comments" to "Newest first" or you open the complete comment section which can kill your browser if too big. If your comment gets enough thumbs up it sticks on top.
But on this video it has only some few comment, will see if this is possible, just added a link to the EEVblog video.
-
@CanadianAvenger, did you spend a dollar on the IGG campaign? If so I would spam the comments section as I and others do on the Ritot campaign. Just post the link to the EEVblog video.
-
Nope I refused to give those guys even a penny. As for the visibility of the comments, The count is off by one between when logged in, and not logged in. I did try the various options you listed, and mine never shows while not logged in.
-
So they've admitted that they're not deleting comments, but rather the settings for comment son their videos are set to "approved only". So it appears they're simply not approving any factually correct critical ones. Another interesting thing is that I have been getting email notifications for replies to a particular comment, even if not approved. YouTube/G+ bug perhaps... but funny, given all I see are people calling them out for their ineptitude.
-
I have been spamming their Youtube channel as well.
They did something sneaky there as well, they cleam that it is not the official batteriser youtube channel but merely a channel made by fans... Yeah right...
-
I haven't been spamming them, just making valid comments or replies. With the exception of one which contained a trollish remark, I think I've been pretty civil in my comments.
-
Wow, just wow.... Someone is getting a bit irritated on their Youtube page. I got the following reply on a post (see attached image)
-
another gem...
-
Wow! So, if someone deletes a Youtube comment I made*, I may not even notice it because it still shows up for me (when logged in)? Sneaky! I can understand why they (Youtube) might do that, but that may also explain the horrendous level of Youtube comments.
I think what happens is that you can see your comments, but if a channel like Batteriser has comment moderation turned on your comment won't show up to anyone else until they approve.
There seems to be no indication at the commenters end whether the comment is live or not. Horrible :--
-
What about some kind of anti-batteriser campaign with some other communities? They deserve it, using professional internet offenders to try to scare people. They are making internet bullying activities, that's something serious.
They already crossed that line over 800%, I would say over 9000...
Any ideas about an Anti-Batteriser Coalition? This should make these scammers what they deserve.
Can anyone write a letter to the universities of these teachers and students too? It even visit them personally if close enough.
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
-
Did you guys see this video and disturbingly the comments, just outrageous.
Big thumbs up to Arlen .... :-+....for giving this arsehole some back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6D51Qm4jRc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6D51Qm4jRc)
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/batteriser-expand-the-battery-life-of-disposable-batteries-by-800!/?action=dlattach;attach=165874;image)
-
Brad Jones seems to be a friend of the son of the founder of batteriser. He claims that people who are picking the batteriser claims appart are children but he reacts in a very mature way... ;)
-
I wouldn't waste any more time on it. Really. Just take a deep breath and walk away. It's simply not worth your energy.
People buy nonsense products every day... There is a billion dollar industry for it. Never mind electronics, look at the many other products and foods with misleading and false claims that are marketed.
Warn your friends and family if you must, or make a video rebuttal and post it to YouTube and disable comments so you don't have to deal with word abuse. But honestly there is nothing more that will make these guys happy than to get your heart pumping and your blood pressure up.
-
Doctor Bobby must be so proud to have chaps like Brad defending his project...
-
Their assumptions with respect to battery cut-off voltage may have drawn some scorn but it still remains that if the studies they quote about energy left in discarded batteries are accurate then some people may find this thing useful.
You would need to actually test one before passing a final judgement.
It is not useful and cannot be. At the same price you can buy eneloop (if concerned about self discharge) rechargeables or even cheaper. You'll both save the ecology and money. Also, I already imagine a lot of moaning idiots, because batteries leaked and damaged their devices because of the deep discharge (if this thing will be actually delivered).
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
The plan would be do a campaign based on engineering principles, and also a protest against scammy crowdfunding projects in platforms like IGG. This is becoming a very dangerous plague and this will only benefit to big companies, small ones will have a lot more difficult market environment.
A you see, the lack of regulation and massive appearing of professional scammers is making these platforms less attractive to future users because of bad publicity. This could make the business situation even a lot more difficult to future hobbyists and small companies to benefit from crowdfunding campaigns.
This shit is a lot more worse than it seems, there should be a lot more of pressure to platforms like IGG to avoid this. These kind of platforms could give lots of nice opportunities to great smart and creative people, but fraudsters are getting the money instead.
-
Edit: Updated the Youtube comments on my last post to include the full comments, it's actually threatening the boy, and whats more he is one of our own so now I'm really pissed off.
www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?u=105567 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?u=105567)
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
I agree.
Just keep calling out any incorrect, deceptive or stupid technical claims. But no need to tell engineers that, it's what we do ;D
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
I agree.
Just keep calling out any incorrect, deceptive or stupid technical claims. But no need to tell engineers that, it's what we do ;D
Is that enough to stop the flood of scams and snake oil stuff?
I understand stupidity is the most difficult illness to cure in humanity, that requires a very strong focus on education and even reformulate the ways to teach and stimulate people to learn (I believe a sophisticated Active Learning is the best way).
But the worst part of this is that certain organizations like corporations such as IGG close their eyes to scams such as this because they get the money anyway, despite many people inform them about the false promises of the project and the lack of scientific facts about being not possible to do.
Who are the worst ones in this scheme? Batteriser ones aren't, they "just" are tricky liars on an ecosystem that makes it easy to scam people. The worst part of this are the crowdfunding platforms such as IGG, they look elsewhere and get their percentage as any corrupt organization.
It's cool to make videos and have your name on some mass media, we live on a world where being known and famous can give you many advantages. But if close you are doing it in both a very educative and entertaining way, you deserve it a lot much more than all these movie stars.
Maybe debunking isn't enough, maybe legal and stronger educative action is necessary to stop stupid consumers and penalize scammers.
I think that the involved teacher must be known to be part of a scam and his university should take actions against his lack of ethics. Maybe there's even there's an student organization in the university that can protest about it too.
It's not about bullying them, they are already doing it with proxy entities to some activists as you see. They have money to make cool videos and lie people without the minimal scientific knowledge to understand it (something I consider it a massive fail of most educative systems/methodologies, of course), those aren't a bunch of occasional eBay scammers but something a lot more serious with big money that need to be stopped ASAP.
There's more like them, this could kill the crowdfunding ecosystem that made possible to do nice products without need to get loans or be under other kind of corporate slavery.
It's funny to debate and rant all time, but this shit is a lot more serious than it seems and there's need to do something about it. Crowdfunding is becoming a bubble that a lot of shady opportunists are taking advantage of it, this needs to change to make it a sustainable business model.
-
The issues for me:
- Bringing the field of Electrical Engineering into disrepute by making claims that are incongruent with the facts as the overwhelming majority the industry know them.
- I object to the premises being made that are thus totally unreproducable
- I object to the designers and manufacturers of the referenced "80% wasteful" devices being unfairly maligned.
- I object to the apparent abuse of academic credentials to argue unreproducable premises from authority.
- I object to the claiming of inflated academic credentials. I refer to the supposed "Professor of Electrical Engineering" in the "Batteriser Buggers a Monkey" video who received his UNDERGRADUATE degree in 2014.
- I object to Silicon Valley's adoption of the PT Barnum marketing model and financing these ridiculous ventures while kicking folks with more humble, but very viable business ideas to the curb.
- I object to the abuse of Corporate immunity in making these claims.
- I object to such ventures subsequently going public and convincing institutional investors to gamble people's retirement funds on magical thinking.
It's about a lot more than $2.50. These types of questionable ventures are rendering the United States a planetary laughingstock when it comes to engineering practices.
-
https://youtu.be/yuaA-rUBmEc
"If you actually go through the video almost frame by frame, the power supply cuts out at 1.872volts, while the batteries were 1.876volts...
CLEARLY! you can't use a power supply to test the battery cut off voltage, that's a difference of 0.2%!"
:-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
I agree.
Just keep calling out any incorrect, deceptive or stupid technical claims. But no need to tell engineers that, it's what we do ;D
Is that enough to stop the flood of scams and snake oil stuff?
No, but nothing is.
I also would not call this one a scam (yet). Questionable marketing? Absolutely! But if they deliver a working product then it's not a scam imho.
I understand stupidity is the most difficult illness to cure in humanity, that requires a very strong focus on education and even reformulate the ways to teach and stimulate people to learn (I believe a sophisticated Active Learning is the best way).
I believe sometime's people need to bump their head to learn something, I know I did.. And it look's like about 5000 (4555 backers atm) people are going to learn something. And 5000 on a worldwide scale really is not that much, nor will the investment make them bankrupt.
I think that the involved teacher must be known to be part of a scam and his university should take actions against his lack of ethics. Maybe there's even there's an student organization in the university that can protest about it too.
Well I do agree that this saga is really bad for the reputation of the universities.
It's funny to debate and rant all time, but this shit is a lot more serious than it seems and there's need to do something about it. Crowdfunding is becoming a bubble that a lot of shady opportunists are taking advantage of it, this needs to change to make it a sustainable business model.
Crowdfunding is not shopping. It gives the funders the chance to be the first to have something really cool (think Occulus rift or Pebble) but there is also the risk that the product doesn't perform as wanted (or not at all). This risk is a part of the game, and this risk can be reduced by doing some investigation.
Dave did a great job showing that the claims made by batteriser are wrong. Now people can decide themselves what they are going to believe. At least the information is now there, it should be hard to find for anyone doing the search
-
The packaging of the batteriser is innovative, and it will definitely be capable of extending battery life in some very specific applications.
The problem is that those applications will be edge cases and for the majority of devices it will not extend life and possibly will reduce it. Plus it introduces the hazard of battery leakage and you lose any remaining battery life indications.
-
I want a battery that will send me email reminders that it is nearly dead, and should be removed from the device before it leaks.
-
It's about a lot more than $2.50. These types of questionable ventures are rendering the United States a planetary laughingstock when it comes to engineering practices.
This kind of thing trancends national and cultural borders, wherever money is involved you will get it.
And as for engineering practices, the conduct on this forum in some quarters has significantly departed from simple buy-the-numbers comment on this products performance. You can feel the moral high ground shifting from under our feet at times.
Looking past the exagerated claims and dubious measurement methodology it could be that there is some innovative engineering. Something that we must wait for actual units with which to conduct tests before an informed judgement can be made. I think some people commenting have overreached with their judgement in the absence of test units.
There probably won't be anything in the performance that surprised experienced people but for me the test of this products worth is how it affects the consumption and disposal of batteries and how robust it proves to be. It looks flimsy and cautious phrasing on the IGG campaign page tends to support that.
If Bob And Frankie had designed an advanced boost converter that would consistently extract another 5% of energy out of an alkaline battery, that would have been plenty good. That would provide a huge economic and environmental benefit in aggregate. And it could have been licensed and designed into devices as the primary boost converter.
I don't feel I have overreached with my comments. I don't need to have the Batteriser device to know that it cannot extract energy which no longer is present.
-
It was a general comment. Not aimed at you. But your final sentence cuts to the heart of my comments. People DO throw away batteries with energy remaining and Batteriser are not claiming to manufacture energy where none exists. Their claims are rubbery enough and don't require sloppy or imprecise interpretation.
Creating a low voltage boost converter in such a tiny form factor that is capable of an alleged 1.3A continuous and 4.5A peak takes some not inconsiderable skill. However the bullshit claims and the laughable test methodologies the in their videos suggest they are either incompetent and/or very dishonest.
If the Batteriser is real and they employed a proper engineer to design it then why didn't they get his or her advice on the test methodologies? If the same people that did the videos actually designed the device, then you already know it won't work.
-
And as for engineering practices, the conduct on this forum in some quarters has significantly departed from simple buy-the-numbers comment on this products performance. You can feel the moral high ground shifting from under our feet at times.
Looking past the exagerated claims and dubious measurement methodology it could be that there is some innovative engineering. Something that we must wait for actual units with which to conduct tests before an informed judgement can be made. I think some people commenting have overreached with their judgement in the absence of test units.
Don't confuse everyone laughing and poking fun at their crazy BS claims with lack of respect for any actual engineering.
Both brothers have the credentials to design innovative miniature hardware. They say they have developed custom IP and silicon for this thing, as well as the ultra-miniature electronics, and I think few if any engineers here or anywhere else would not give them credit for that. But because there is no hardware to test, no performance curves, no details on the actual hardware tech at all, people naturally aren't talking about that. So that's not really the communities fault.
Remember that it is them that have provided endless material to be lampooned, and no other technical info for the community to take them the last bit seriously, so it's not surprising the response they got.
If they published the efficiency envelope from day 1 they might have been taken a lot more seriously, as we'd have some tech to talk about instead of monkey's arses.
It looks flimsy and cautious phrasing on the IGG campaign page tends to support that.
And it also failed twice in front of the Yahoo reporter. But you can probably cut them some slack there because they are prototypes.
-
I'm poking Bob and Frankie precisely *because* they are educated men with credentials. If I thought they were stupid, I wouldn't bother. It's tough love. They're better than this.
I don't think they're horrible people. Their family and friends obviously love them and have rallied around to support them. They'd probably be a fun crew to have over for a barbecue.
But these crazy claims have to stop.
-
But these crazy claims have to stop.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
-
Giving critique on the claims based on engineering principles is just fine.
Organized anti-campaigns - or spamming - aren't.
I agree.
Just keep calling out any incorrect, deceptive or stupid technical claims. But no need to tell engineers that, it's what we do ;D
Is that enough to stop the flood of scams and snake oil stuff?
No, but nothing is.
I also would not call this one a scam (yet). Questionable marketing? Absolutely! But if they deliver a working product then it's not a scam imho.
Marketing and delivering a product that you know does not meet up to the claims is still a scam. These guys are trying to profit off of peoples ignorance. I'm pretty sure they're not that stupid as to believe their product actually does what they claim. In fact due to quiescent losses, the Batterizer might actually have a negative impact of battery life in your device, if you put it on a fresh battery, as they suggest you can.
Incidentally, looks like Batterizer has disabled comments on all of the videos. I guess they couldn't take the heat of people asking real questions, and making valid criticisms. I guess the signs were showing that they were cracking when they nasty replies they were making started surfacing..
-
I also would not call this one a scam (yet). Questionable marketing? Absolutely! But if they deliver a working product then it's not a scam imho.
Marketing and delivering a product that you know does not meet up to the claims is still a scam.
If only every claim I have ever heard in the marketing of a product was completely true...
But these batteroo guys really deserve a masters degree in exaggeration. And not only that, they are also extremely talented in picking facts that suit them, and then rearrange them into a whole new beautiful truth, while gracefully skipping the facts that are not so nice.
So yeah, by now they are crossing the line for me too.
-
As a follow-up. Looks like comments are open again on their videos. Speaking of... anyone pick up on any of the slights of hand? I wasted my time on the "full length" video, hoping for an explanation of how the batterizer works, as they promised to do... they never got there. All we get is a 45min talk on why simply measuring cut-out voltage is not enough, and using constant current draw graphs are inaccurate. I hope Dave feels up to another rebuttal.
-
I for one, think the Batteriser is great and all it is claimed to be, and have bought a container load.
I tried the battery charging methods in this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brdmnUBAS00 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brdmnUBAS00)
and it worked great, so I believe the Batteriser people too.
Remember: "It's called electrical tape because it conducts electricity". :-+
PS: All of the above is a load of crap, in case it wasn't obvious. :-DD
So many flaws and specious arguments I can't even start addressing them all. I can't wait until someone sends Dave some of them to test. :box:
-
Wow! What is amazing is that video has almost 5 million views.
Great advice :palm:
-
Wow! What is amazing is that video has almost 5 million views.
Great advice :palm:
It's a pisstake. He did a few of them, sadly doesn't make them anymore. Recommend watching them - they're absolutely hilarious and really, really well done.
-
When the units are delivered, does consumer law 'fit for purpose' apply?
-
When the units are delivered, does consumer law 'fit for purpose' apply?
it always applies to consumer good. Hardly anyone will bother to return them though.
-
As a follow-up. Looks like comments are open again on their videos.
But they have disabled thumbs since my video exposing the fake dislikes.
-
As a follow-up. Looks like comments are open again on their videos.
But they have disabled thumbs since my video exposing the fake dislikes.
I suspect that whoever made the decision to go with that particular action (buying thumbs-downs) really didn't think you'd pick up on it, much less make a video exposing it. Naive perhaps?
-
I suspect that whoever made the decision to go with that particular action (buying thumbs-downs) really didn't think you'd pick up on it, much less make a video exposing it. Naive perhaps?
Totally naive.
Any youtuber creator would pick up on it, let alone a professional youtuber. :palm:
-
They started refunding the Backers that doesn't want to wait any longer.
Like always some people think you can create a new product (even a not working as advertised one >:D ) in 3 months.
-
I see the Comments section of their crowdfunder is full of angry people waiting on delivery or who only got partial refunds.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/batteriser-extend-battery-life-by-up-to-8x#/comments (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/batteriser-extend-battery-life-by-up-to-8x#/comments)
-
They got sued by Energizer
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/ (http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/)
-
In the court document you can read via that link they said they would be shipping their product in March. Though it too did not specify the year.
And note the timeline, now they have enough excuses to run this out past next year.
-
Interesting, the complaint however is more a trademark dispute, similarity of the names could suggest Batterizer is associated with Energizer. Energizer's complaint note that the Batteriser name and its actual function are not descriptive of what it does and could be deceptive.
They got sued by Energizer
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/ (http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2oy0gcdxs/uspto-trademark-trial-and-appeal-board/energizer-brands-llc-v-batteroo-inc/)
-
(http://i67.tinypic.com/14w6fbq.png)
They begun to ship it, looks like the user experience is great so far. :-DD :palm:
-
It is incredible that it boost up to 99% from 54% after plug in
|O |O |O
And if you put a small circuit to fake the readings from the fuel level sensor in your car your gas gauge would read full too, that doesn't mean it actually is...
What gets me is the company does nothing to stop this misinformation, in fact they seem to be actively encouraging it.
-
What gets me is the company does nothing to stop this misinformation, in fact they seem to be actively encouraging it.
Why should they? Their entire business model is built around it.