EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)

[Halcyon]

61 9 7595 4793

09 (or 9) is not a valid area code for Australian numbers and doesn't exist on our numbering plan. It could be a VOIP service masquerading a false caller ID.

For those who would like a riveting read, refer to Schedule 1 of the Telecommunications Numbering Plan 2015

thanks - I guess they can now they can spoof countries.  Bummed it was not Wayne

Depends on your carrier and back-end systems. There was a time in Australia where with a computer and a modem you could make your caller ID show whatever number you wanted and a few scams worked this way. There are a number of online services purporting to be able to do this as well. I haven't seen this since the early 2000's so I dare say the carriers have patched that one. It's unlikely the call originated from Australia.

[Brumby]

A little self-reflection might be wise.

This, I am sure, is an assessment that a lot of people outside this forum will subscribe to:

I think all the controversy comes down to these people continuing to focus on the same 3 main points:
1. In the early days the product was claimed to increase battery life by up to 8 times (800%). This claim was made due to the performance it showed on a couple of obscure products. The Company has since realised that it was a brash statement to make and have taken a more moderate approach.
2. They launched a crowd funding campaign on Indiegogo with a delivery date of November 2015. There was delay after delay to the point that they are only just delivering those orders now. Being a year late has not made people happy and hence the claims of it being a scam. (I got in reasonably early and mine only just arrived recently).
3. Because they did not publically disclose the inner workings of their invention, it has continued to be shrouded in mystery which has upset all the electronics buffs out there.

Dogged, unmitigating, staunch, negative opinion that gives no quarter to ANY positive indications from this product is a SURE WAY to destroy credibility - and this thread is full of it.


As much as we all understand what the Batteroo sleeve CAN'T do, we had better allow ourselves to acknowledge what it can or might be able to do - because if Bob and Co. come up with a list of, say, 3 marketable things that the product can deliver - even if they are not what was in the original design spec. - then the utterly condemning EE's have lost all credibility in the eyes of the general public.

Why do you think Dave posted this?:

I've said it before and I'll say it again for those non-technical people who might happen upon the forum, in extra bold large font size and bright colour for easy reference 

There isn't a single engineer on the planet that even remotely doubts the Batteriser will "work" as a boost converter and give you 1.5V output from a "dead" or "used" battery.

[Mike Warren]

People here are focussing on what it CAN'T do - and giving no consideration to what it can.  Please tell me what is wrong with this:

You’ve got a normal flashlight (not the LED type). You put a new battery in it and turn it on for a long time. Soon after switching it on it will start to dull but you won’t notice it at first. Then you start to notice it getting duller but it’s still bright enough for you. At some point you decide it’s not bright enough anymore so you change the battery to a new one. You know it could have lasted quite a bit longer but you like it brighter. In this case you could put Batteroo on the old battery and get some more brightness for a bit longer. The other way to do it would be to put the Batteroo on at the start and the torch would be much brighter for a longer period of time but the battery won’t last as long as the dull torch without the Batteroo.
So with a flashlight, it’s not really important to make the battery last longer but rather trying to keep it as bright as possible for as long as possible.

No, it's not the original intent - but it is a marketable function

This is what I'm seeing. The claims of what it can do are being modified to become more realistic. It's a similar technique to the one used by politicians. Average consumers will soon forget the original claims.

[timb]

People here are focussing on what it CAN'T do - and giving no consideration to what it can.  Please tell me what is wrong with this:

You’ve got a normal flashlight (not the LED type). You put a new battery in it and turn it on for a long time. Soon after switching it on it will start to dull but you won’t notice it at first. Then you start to notice it getting duller but it’s still bright enough for you. At some point you decide it’s not bright enough anymore so you change the battery to a new one. You know it could have lasted quite a bit longer but you like it brighter. In this case you could put Batteroo on the old battery and get some more brightness for a bit longer. The other way to do it would be to put the Batteroo on at the start and the torch would be much brighter for a longer period of time but the battery won’t last as long as the dull torch without the Batteroo.
So with a flashlight, it’s not really important to make the battery last longer but rather trying to keep it as bright as possible for as long as possible.

No, it's not the original intent - but it is a marketable function

This is what I'm seeing. The claims of what it can do are being modified to become more realistic. It's a similar technique to the one used by politicians. Average consumers will soon forget the original claims.

Exactly. We all know what it *can* do. We've all--long, long ago--said there are some niche cases where it could be useful.

However, Wayne clearly doesn't have the needed skills to correctly test what it can do and he's unwilling to let someone with the skills to test it! This is made clear by the fact he tested the battery voltage at the sleeve output...

We're interested in how much current it can put out, the actual minimum battery voltage it can run at, quiescent current, etc.

In his "essay" he's basically moving the goal posts. That's what we've got issue with.

Also, if it's a useable function, then that's how they should market it. That's what this boils down to: We take issue with how they're marketing the product. It can't do what they claim, even though it may be able to do something.

[Fungus]

As much as we all understand what the Batteroo sleeve CAN'T do, we had better allow ourselves to acknowledge what it can or might be able to do - because if Bob and Co. come up with a list of, say, 3 marketable things that the product can deliver - even if they are not what was in the original design spec. - then the utterly condemning EE's have lost all credibility in the eyes of the general public.

We're missing exactly one data point - the curve of efficiency vs. current. If you give us that data we'll be able to tell you exactly what it can and can't achieve.

So far the Batteroo Brothers have done everything they possibly can to keep that information away from people.

And that is why we assume it's rubbish and why we condemn it. If it was a decent curve Bob would be flaunting it. 

[Cerebus]

61 9 7595 4793

09 (or 9) is not a valid area code for Australian numbers and doesn't exist on our numbering plan. It could be a VOIP service masquerading a false caller ID.

For those who would like a riveting read, refer to Schedule 1 of the Telecommunications Numbering Plan 2015

I was about to suggest the same. I get about 1 fraudulent call per month and I can always spot them in advance because they fake the CLI but don't seem to know their way around numbering systems well enough to present realistic numbers. Because I'm primed for a possibly fraudulent call before I pick the phone up I'm also primed to promptly lead them on a wild goose chase. Heh, heh, heh,...

[Brumby]

Exactly. We all know what it *can* do. We've all--long, long ago--said there are some niche cases where it could be useful.

Agreed - but that message is lost to antiquity.

However, Wayne clearly doesn't have the needed skills to correctly test what it can do and he's unwilling to let someone with the skills to test it! This is made clear by the fact he tested the battery voltage at the sleeve output...

I have to agree with that.  His efforts at "engineering tests" have been rather short of the mark - but he is doing some "user tests" that will carry him for a bit.

We're interested in how much current it can put out, the actual minimum battery voltage it can run at, quiescent current, etc.

I'm anxious for those figures as much as anyone.  Once they have been quantified, we can provide a LOT more definitive assessment in various applications.  Can't wait.

In his "essay" he's basically moving the goal posts. That's what we've got issue with.

Also, if it's a useable function, then that's how they should market it. That's what this boils down to: We take issue with how they're marketing the product. It can't do what they claim, even though it may be able to do something.

As was mentioned above, the moving of the goal posts is a gradual one and most of the public will follow them without noticing until the product is placed in a marketable zone.  The EE criticisms will still be stuck on the things that are an issue.  The public will see the EEs as saying nothing good, when they have something in their hand that they have seen does something useful for them.

I'm not saying that we roll over and play ball with Bob - but it would be much better to acknowledge some positive aspect (when there is something positive to acknowledge) as part of a criticism than to just offer the criticism.

There is some of that on this thread - but it is buried by all the rest.


And let's not forget all the rampant speculation - from the logical (yet unproven) conclusions to the extreme.  Some of these have spawned pages of discussion that should have had less than a dozen lines.  All it would take is some provable facts to be published and this whole thread - and forum, for that matter - to lose credibility in the eyes of the public.


I can only take comfort that the members here - irrespective of the thoughts shared on this thread - will, for the most part, appreciate and understand the interests and concerns with the Batteroo sleeve.

[Brumby]

As much as we all understand what the Batteroo sleeve CAN'T do, we had better allow ourselves to acknowledge what it can or might be able to do - because if Bob and Co. come up with a list of, say, 3 marketable things that the product can deliver - even if they are not what was in the original design spec. - then the utterly condemning EE's have lost all credibility in the eyes of the general public.

We're missing exactly one data point - the curve of efficiency vs. current. If you give us that data we'll be able to tell you exactly what it can and can't achieve.

So far the Batteroo Brothers have done everything they possibly can to keep that information away from people.

And that is why we assume it's rubbish and why we condemn it. If it was a decent curve Bob would be flaunting it. 

I'd like a few graphs myself, but the curve you speak of is only half the story.  The other half is the battery chemistry - or, more particularly, the state of charge within it.  That is something you cannot objectively state, since the condition of even a partially used battery is too variable for more than general statements.

How it performs out in the field is what is going to make or break this thing - and that is a function of the device (which we can precisely characterize), the sleeve (which we can characterize - when we get the specs) and the battery - which we can only guess at. 

Besides, the "Wayne" tests that reflect usage by the public are going to carry more weight - because they can understand the results better than the datasheet we would prefer.

[amspire]

I really think that everybody bagging Wayne have lost touch with reality. 

He is a reseller, and probably would love to be a distributor. Why? Because the Batteriser concept does work - we have always admitted that a battery booster is possible - and because it does have a market. It is not an evil product - it is just a product that has a real market. Not as big a market as Batteroo claimed, but a market. Wayne is a businessman and he can see real money in having Batterisers on the shelves in spite of the history. I do not have any problem with that at all.

If I had a device that works better with 1.5V batteries and a Batteriser was on the supermarket shelves for $2.50, I would definitely buy it, as long as it worked. If I would buy it, then so would millions of other people.

Wayne has said the 800% battery power stuff was rubbish, and he has tried to put his own positive spin on the device. Even in his attempt to support Batteroo, he has undercut their number one claim.

The issue is the behaviour of Batteroo, not Wayne. It is obvious that Batteroo have been struggling - really struggling, and I am seeing a very strong feeling here of bloodlust - kicking someone when they are down. They are in a situation where the real cost of the first devices they have could be, say,  $50 a device and they somehow have to get through this till they can get to a point when they can start offering bulk devices to distributors like Wayne. If they can get to that point (which could mean fixing a mass of manufacturing/reliability/performance issues) they can probably easily sell millions of devices, and they can start to make money. In order to hang in, they may have told a few porkies? It happens when start-ups get desperate. There are many successful companies that survived at the start with some very dodgy behaviour.

If they are successful, will there be lots of cheap clones on the market? How strong are the pending patents given that they have no real claim to the switching converters - just the metal clip? Even if they can make profitable $2.50 devices, their future will be uncertain.

The technical claims from Batteroo are misleading and insufficient, but that is the same for many other products on the market. How many ads have you seen of one-wipe cleaning products that make stoves, showers, bathtubs, etc sparking clean and residue-free in one effortless wipe? How many frozen meals look absolutely nothing like the picture on the pack? How many expensive products at the chemist actually do nothing? How many cars meet the fuel consumption figures claimed by the manufacturer on their sales brochures?

I do not feel like I rubbishing the big supermarket chains, publicly digging up personal detail of company officials, posting pictures of their houses.

Here is exactly what a lawyer will have told Batteroo. "Don't respond to over-the-top statements on the eevblog forum - record everything. The more they say, the easier the defamation/damage case will be." If Batteroo fail - even better for the law case. If they win the legal action, they make millions from people here. If they loose, you get no legal costs refunded. Either way, you loose.

This is the advice that I know lawyers have given to other people who have suffered attacks on forums, and I cannot see why the advice to Batteroo will be any different.

Calm down. Stop the mob mentality. Stop attacking individuals just because they want to support Batteroo. Stop investigating and publicizing the details of people just because they received a Batteriser. Stop the wild speculation.

That is just my advice. If that makes me an idiot, I can live with that. I would prefer to be regarded as a fool then to see one forum member loose their house.

Just get back to the science. That is what you do well.

Richard

[Halcyon]

Richard you make some good and very valid points, however Wayne hasn't exactly been an angel either, starting with the hostile e-mail to Dave and his forum posts. I said it before and I'll repeat it here again: That was just poor form. On a personal level, I find his attitude a little undesirable.

I also think he hasn't been completely honest with us, not deliberately being deceitful or lying but certainly withholding details. This is just my opinion, based on nothing more than I have read here. Call it a gut feeling or educated guess if you like.

As for Batteroo lawyers launching any kind of defamation suit against anyone on this forum, good luck with that. They would have almost no hope in subpoenaing any identifying information on anyone on this forum (except for those who live in the USA). I'm sure Dave could just as quickly hit the 'delete' button on the log file containing people's IP addresses (or replacing them with false ones). As for Dave himself, he hasn't said anything that can be even remotely considered defamatory and he as the forum owner cannot be held responsible for what others post.

[amspire]

Richard you make some good and very valid points, however Wayne hasn't exactly been an angel either, starting with the hostile e-mail to Dave and his forum posts. I said it before and I'll repeat it here again: That was just poor form. On a personal level, I find his attitude leave little to be desired.

I also think he isn't been completely honest to us, not deliberately being deceitful or lying but certainly withholding details. This is just my opinion, based on nothing more than I have read here. Call it a gut feeling or educated guess if you like.

So what. He doesn't have to be. He didn't ask to be attacked in this forum, and he probably does want to be a distributor.

As for Batteroo lawyers launching any kind of defamation suit against anyone on this forum, good luck with that. They would have almost no hope in subpoenaing any identifying information on anyone on this forum (except for those who live in the USA). I'm sure Dave could just as quickly hit the 'delete' button on the log file containing people's IP addresses (or replacing them with false ones). As for Dave himself, he hasn't said anything that can be even remotely considered defamatory and he as the forum owner cannot be held responsible for what others post.

If a lawyer sniffs a 10 million dollar fee, there is a lot they can do. They might be recording every post in the forum so they can try and track people down. They can directly go to Dave's hosting site with a court order rather then Dave. I think Dave's site is in the US. If Dave wipes the forum, they will already have everything they want recorded. I don't mean possibly - I mean they will definitely have the posts recorded.

Is the fun of attacking Bob worth the risk? Really?

[Halcyon]

If a lawyer sniffs a 10 million dollar fee, there is a lot they can do. They might be recording every post in the forum so they can try and track people down.

Is the fun of attacking Bob worth the risk? Really?

They can record every post all they like, they can't see the IP addresses of those who published them.

And yes, people have had digs at Bob, but I can honestly put my hand up and say that I would be totally happy to repeat everything I've written about him to his face if it came down to it. Anyway, let's not digress.

[amspire]

If a lawyer sniffs a 10 million dollar fee, there is a lot they can do. They might be recording every post in the forum so they can try and track people down.

Is the fun of attacking Bob worth the risk? Really?

They can record every post all they like, they can't see the IP addresses of those who published them.

And yes, people have had digs at Bob, but I can honestly put my hand up and say that I would be totally happy to repeat everything I've written about him to his face if it came down to it. Anyway, let's not digress.

I hit "Post" too early, so I modified my post a bit since you replied. The thing is perhaps you may stand by everything you have said, but it does not mean you do not find you have a lawsuit to worry about. Lawyers don't really care much if your are right or wrong. They just want to know if you are a target.

[rich]

Calm down. Stop the mob mentality. Stop attacking individuals just because they want to support Batteroo. Stop investigating and publicizing the details of people just because they received a Batteriser. Stop the wild speculation.

Yes, this.

Any potential reseller has a vested interest in highlighting the marketable properties and not angering the supplier. It also makes sense to talk and collaborate on joint marketing or at least an aligned marketing message.

The issue is the behaviour of Batteroo, not Wayne. It is obvious that Batteroo have been struggling - really struggling, and I am seeing a very strong feeling here of bloodlust - kicking someone when they are down.
...
In order to hang in, they may have told a few porkies? It happens when start-ups get desperate. There are many successful companies that survived at the start with some very dodgy behaviour.
...
The technical claims from Batteroo are misleading and insufficient, but that is the same for many other products on the market.

Yes many startups will flex timescale and present claims favourably. However, Batteroo took this to a whole new level: Overhyped claims with zero public evidence, actively evasive answers or lack of answers to direct questions, withholding information that backers had a right to know, claiming IGG campaign was ready for production. And let's not forget the whole paid dislikes episode.

It's Bateroo's actions that have caused everyone to stay interested in the story either for entertainment or as an karmic engineering debunk exercise. Let's not forget Batteroo aren't novices doing their first ever production run, these are, supposedly, senior professionals in the industry and they like to remind us of it repeatedly.

[EEVblog]

More information from Wayne:
BATTERISER / BATTEROO (new name) - what’s all the fuss about?
This article is a summary of my thoughts and opinions of the new Batteroo electronic device that is currently being launched by a US Company.
I have been following this product since its inception because of my interest in batteries.
Should the product meet my expectations, I am actually thinking of becoming a reseller or distributor in Australia. I am based in Darwin in the Northern Territory.
The Company and product are both called Batteroo.
The Batteroo is a micro-thin reusable sleeve that slots neatly over most normal disposable batteries such as common AA’s and AAA’s.
It contains patented technology which is designed to enhance the performance and / or increase the overall lifespan of batteries.
So the big question is – DOES IT WORK?
That is a big point of contention at this moment in time!

No, that has NEVER been the question. It's a DC-DC boost converter with 4 parts, we know it works, it's bread and butter stuff for electronics engineers.

There are many theories out there

No there aren't. It's a basic DC-DC boost converter. There is no magic.

and a number of people who adamantly believe that the product is a scam and will never be delivered and if it is delivered, then it won’t work.

Not a single person in the industry or on this forum has said it "won't work" as a boost converter.

The problem is who to believe?

The person with the data.

Most of the people I’ve come across have a vested interest of some sort so it’s hard to get to the bottom of it.

I and everyone else on here has ZERO vested interest in this apart from academic curiosity over some ridiculous claims.

Of course, I have a vested interest as well if I want to be a seller of the product but I have no firm commitments or agreements at this stage. Some people have been insinuating that I’m somehow involved directly with Batteroo or I’m being manipulated by them in some way. It’s amazing how a small $2.50 product can result in so much dirty politics!

When you make wild claims and then provide no data to back it up, yep, that happens.

There’s even one blog that has a complete thread which has been running for a couple of years that’s dedicated to the subject of proving that it will never be delivered or actually work.

Demonstrably untrue and completely ignorant of what this thread and mine and others videos are about.

When I followed the blog for a couple weeks, there were about 50 contributors but only a regular handful who are obsessed enough to make it a mission to see the product fail.

Rubbish, we have just been asking for over a year to for them to provide data (as they promised) to back up their extraordinary claims.

However, they are really quite insignificant in the big scheme of things.

Really? This forum has shaped the development of this product and it's claims, that's hardly insignificant.
Again and argument based on ignorance of the history here.

I think all the controversy comes down to these people continuing to focus on the same 3 main points:
1. In the early days the product was claimed to increase battery life by up to 8 times (800%). This claim was made due to the performance it showed on a couple of obscure products.

Nope, zero evidence of that was provided.

The Company has since realised that it was a brash statement to make and have taken a more moderate approach.

Nope, they still claim on the website that 80% of batteries capacity is unused. And they make no qualification for that claim.

2. They launched a crowd funding campaign on Indiegogo with a delivery date of November 2015. There was delay after delay to the point that they are only just delivering those orders now. Being a year late has not made people happy and hence the claims of it being a scam. (I got in reasonably early and mine only just arrived recently).

People questioned the claims of this product from day 1, it had nothing to do with delivery.

3. Because they did not publically disclose the inner workings of their invention, it has continued to be shrouded in mystery which has upset all the electronics buffs out there.

Rubbish.
It's a basic DC-DC converter boost converter, even Batteroo admit this. Their patent is based on the form factor of fitting it onto a sleeve.
There is ZERO mystery in how the Batteriser works.
Once again and argument ignorant of the technical facts.

Being scientists and engineers, I don’t believe the founders of the Business understood or realised the importance of communicating to their customers and keeping them up to date with the progress of the product. There should have also been more clarity and information on what the product can achieve in the real world. Most people are not really interested in detailed technical specifications. Maybe they should have had a dedicated PR person to manage it all but I guess it costs a lot of money to get something like this going from scratch?

They didn't expect to be called out on their demonstrably bullshit claims.

[EEVblog]

As for Dave himself, he hasn't said anything that can be even remotely considered defamatory and he as the forum owner cannot be held responsible for what others post.

Correct. In fact I've been very generous toward them playing devil's advocate when I had no obligation to.
If you want to talk defamation, Bob flat out accused me of being paid by Duracell in a national Newspaper.
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/batteriser-battery-life-extender-scam-or-saviour-20150915-gjmrql.html

[ccs46]

I think he actually tried to do the first test by himself but chickened out and called Bob for advice. Bob then sent him that text to post.

I still haven't decided if the two flashlights/torches were included in the parcel or not.  (I guess we'll never know the answer to that one though)

The obvious clue (in hindsight) was the massive hostility towards Dave. Where would that come from? You only need to watch a single EEVBLOG video to know what Dave is like.

I think me and Brumby have finally found the reasoning for the high salt content of that message... It might be Uncle Bob pulling the strings...

[EEVblog]

Taps draining juice into flashlights?? I've heard that somewhere else recently...

Nice graphic.
Shame they don't tell you most adequately designed active load products cut out around 1V or 1.1V at worst.
That doesn't give you much extra juice out of that battery


Of course Batteroo admits this and his entire long technical explained video is spent explaining how it's all about the nasty current spikes in products. Again most adequately designed battery powered products don't have this issue which is why Batteroo find it so hard to demo this in everyday products.

[johndoe123]

did they run out of money and used a text to voice software instead of hiring someone from fiverr?

[quad]

New post from Wayne on his Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/revivebatteries/

REVIVE BATTERIES – A Credible and Honest Business that Sells Batteries.

I am writing this post as a matter of record to clearly explain my interest and involvement with the Batteroo Company and their Product so there can be no further doubt or speculation.

In July 2015 I pledged to buy some Batteroos (previously called Batteriser) from the crowd funding site, Indiegogo. After that, I researched the product and the people behind it extensively (including the large amounts of negativity on some select internet blogs). I thought it may have some potential, so I contacted them via email. I got a response in May this year and that led to some further emails where they agreed that I could become a reseller in my own state of the Northern Territory, Australia. There were no firm commitments by either side and it depended on the simple fact that the Batteroo was actually a viable and saleable product. In October, I happened to be in California on a holiday and was driving past the Batteroo offices so I arranged to stop in. My wife and I had a brief tour of the offices and met with a couple of the Batteroo Managers. It was just a meet and greet but we did discuss me being a stockist.

On November23, I finally received my order of Batteroos. I went onto the Indiegogo site and left a simple comment to say I had received mine and that they did in fact increase the voltage of a couple of batteries that I had quickly tested.

From that simple comment, things turned crazy. I received numerous phone calls, emails and comments on blogs. I had read a couple of blogs before but have never actually been on one before. My integrity was questioned, my honesty was questioned, my credibility was questioned, a Google street view of my house was publically posted, I was publically ridiculed, my involvement with Batteroo was speculated about and it just went on and on and is still happening now.
Quite frankly, a lot of it is defamatory to both myself and my Business and I hope it doesn’t damage my reputation. (I wonder if the administrator of a blog can be held accountable for defamatory statements of its registered members?)

Having said all this I do admit that I did not behave appropriately at all times either. The owner of the EEVblog had the nerve to email me and offer to buy my Batteroos at an inflated price when at exactly the same time he knew I was being publically questioned ridiculed by some members of his blog. They did not expect that I had read them. My email response was angry, rude and to the point and I guess I could have toned it down a bit. I also collectively called the members on the blog tossers. I also baited them by posting questionable Batteroo tests on the site.

I will publish a selection of their blog comments at the end of this post so you are able to make up your own minds.

In the meantime, I have continued to be in contact with Batteroo via email. I have asked them numerous questions about the product and how it functions. I have also raised a lot of the issues that appear on these blogs. My number one priority still remains, is it a viable product and is it something that I want to stock and sell? At this time, I still have no commitment one way or the other.

Yesterday, I had a long conference call with the entire Senior Management team of Batteroo. This was the first time I had the opportunity to meet and talk to most of them and it was a very productive call. I was impressed by their enthusiasm and energy in trying to get this product to market. They explained a lot to me and I saw some information and also some videos of tests with the Batteroo in operation. It makes a lot more sense to me now. They were also quite open and up front in recognising that in hindsight there were a lot of things they could have done better. I furnished them with a number of questions and concerns, some of them taken directly from the EEVBlog site. Most of them were covered off to my satisfaction and there are a couple of points that they are going to look into and get back to me.

I stress again, there are no commitments or deals between Revive Batteries and Batteroo at this stage. That’s not to say there won’t be in the future if I can feel confident in selling their product and they actually want to supply it to me.

Patience is the key here, this is a start up business and things don’t always go smoothly in the early days. I think all the detractors will be back peddling or going to ground in the near future if things transpire the way I think they will.

Thanks for your time,
Wayne.
Revive Batteries.

Some random comments from the EEVblog:
(The Bob referred to below is the CEO of Batteroo – I had never met him or spoken to him until yesterday’s conference call)

“Wayne doesn't strike me as an EEVBLOG reader but...
...he knew exactly who Dave was. He new that Dave had been badmouthing” “Batteriser. That Dave was The Enemy. How does that work if you're just a random person who received some Batterisers in the post?
And the conclusion he got from Dave's videos was that Dave is a "Complete Tosser"? Nah, I reckon he was primed to think that by somebody.”

“I enjoyed driving by his house via Google.”

“Has anyone considered that Wayne might have a NDA with Bob.”

“Can't say I blame Wayne. Some of the crap that was dumped on him was personal and derived completely from speculation.”

“Is Wayne complicit in any of the Batteroo debacle...? Personally, I don't think so. His responses so far are entirely consistent with someone who has seen a product and wants to give it a go - and is getting pissed off at people who want to give him a hard time about it.”

“At this point, I can see a lot of the negative comments against Wayne as being a simple case of jealousy and sour grapes.... "He has a Batteroo sleeve and I don't!!". I don't blame him for his response - the guy is getting bombarded.”

“And in my opinion, it is time for you and the rest to stop hassling Wayne and psychoanalyzing him without a license or even his permission.”

“If anything, I'd say *he's* the one that's been antagonistic, from the start in fact.”

“I don't know if Wayne is complicit or a dupe, it's impossible to judge.
I do know there's no way in hell Wayne was chosen randomly to receive the only-known box of Batterisers. Bob chose him specifically.”

“His latest comment on IGG reads more like something Bob would say rather than the robust-talking Wayne we are so familiar with on this forum.”

“Looks like Wayne is still helping to protect Bob's reputation on IGG”

“Wayne has posted more nonsensical ramblings on IGG and Facebook.....”

“It's confirmed. Wayne is firmly in the Batteroo camp.”

“I don't know, this doesn't sound like something Wayne would write. Maybe Bob wrote it for him?”

“It's all fancy English, not a single Aussie curse word or mention of 'beer' in the entire thing. He also says "flashlight" instead of "torch", etc.”

“But I have little doubt that all revivebatteries accounts, on facebook, on IGG an here really do belong to Wayne. But it's clear he works together with Batteroo now (just as others stated)”

“100% not his words, his write-up, or his evaluation... All his other references were to it being a "torch" cos that's what it is....”

“I told you so! Wayne has his nose so far up Bob's ass that when Bob wipes his butt, Wayne's mouth goes dry.”

“Wayne is definitely doing some sort of PR or damage control for Butterooter. Like I theorized before, he is definitely involved with Butterooter. “

“Very suspect...”

“Wow... So, Wayne turned out to have an agenda? I'm shocked. Shocked.”

“Not sure if I'd call it an agenda, but he does have a vested interest - something which he has declared.”

“I really think that everybody bagging Wayne have lost touch with reality.”

“Calm down. Stop the mob mentality. Stop attacking individuals just because they want to support Batteroo. Stop investigating and publicizing the details of people just because they received a Batteriser. Stop the wild speculation.”

“As for Batteroo lawyers launching any kind of defamation suit against anyone on this forum, good luck with that. They would have almost no hope in subpoenaing any identifying information on anyone on this forum (except for those who live in the USA). I'm sure Dave could just as quickly hit the 'delete' button on the log file containing people's IP addresses (or replacing them with false ones).”

“He didn't ask to be attacked in this forum, and he probably does want to be a distributor.”

“If a lawyer sniffs a 10 million dollar fee, there is a lot they can do. They might be recording every post in the forum so they can try and track people down. They can directly go to Dave's hosting site with a court order rather then Dave. I think Dave's site is in the US. If Dave wipes the forum, they will already have everything they want recorded. I don't mean possibly - I mean they will definitely have the posts recorded.”

And so on it goes.........................

[quad]

(I wonder if the administrator of a blog can be held accountable for defamatory statements of its registered members?)

Can YouTube be held accountable for what people post in its comments section?

I also baited them by posting questionable Batteroo tests on the site.

That's not very nice, if that was the case. Why not just post accurate information? Dave will be the FIRST to admit he was mistaken if presented with reliable independent data (better yet a Batteriser to run standard tests!)

I furnished them with a number of questions and concerns, some of them taken directly from the EEVBlog site. Most of them were covered off to my satisfaction and there are a couple of points that they are going to look into and get back to me.

What on earth did they tell you?

[LabSpokane]

Wayne,

So you don't have to sift through this now drivel of a thread, the engineers here have always had an issue with the *claims* that Batteroo has made.  No reasonable person thinks the *device* won't act as a voltage booster. It will. The *claims* Bob and Frankie made about the leftover capacity in a battery that is determined to be depleted in the devices they cited is pure, demonstrable baloney. I've bought several of the devices and done the tests, as have others here.

No reasonable person doubts the usefulness and benefit of a boost converter. That's why engineers build them into so many devices. The simple truth is, when talking about consumer devices, it is HARD to find a currently-produced piece of consumer electronics that doesn't do a good to excellent job of using the energy available in its battery(ies). Most of us older folks know that this was *not* always so, and the many devices used to poorly manage their battery use. But this matter has been largely solved for a couple of decades now.

What we doubt, with just cause, is the usefulness of attaching a boost converter to a device that is already designed to obtain the most power out of a battery possible. For many of the consumer devices used as examples by Batteroo, the useful energy available to the device with the Batteriser will be less, not more. It just comes down to the simple thermodynamics of it. The extra conversion process wastes energy. Plain and simple.

If Batteroo had not made claims that were outrageously silly at the outset and just built a battery sleeve that solves a real issue for legacy and niche devices, I, Dave, and many other folks would have said either nothing, or "Job well done, sirs.  Carry on."

That's the simple truth.

[quad]

About all this lawsuit nonsense - I'd understand if they were going after Dave, but as has been pointed out by others, he has said nothing close to defamatory and quite the opposite in fact! Forum owners are not legally responsible for what its members post. This is well established.

Is there seriously a discussion about suing random people in all different countries for saying mean things about you on the Internet?

Talk about an EPIC way to throw away hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions!) in lawyers' fees. Let alone the PR nightmare...

There's got to be a reasonable expectation for criticism if you run a CrowdFunding campaign and take Average Joe's money, run 18 months+ behind what was promised, all while having almost ZERO worthwhile communication on the developments of the product.

Also did everyone forget the nasty personal comments from Ali? Talks of tracking people down and "dumpsters"?? And the YouTube video of Dave? And all the off colour YouTube comments from their "Fan Page"??

[EEVblog]

If Batteroo had not made claims that were outrageously silly at the outset and just built a battery sleeve that solves a real issue for legacy and niche devices, I, Dave, and many other folks would have said either nothing, or "Job well done, sirs.  Carry on."

Yep, and I said so in my first busting video and actually praised their physical design.
I have never sad a single bad word about Bob personally, only doubting the outrageous claims of their product and that of remaining battery capacity, and all of it evidence based.

[ez24]

Wayne please convey our compliments to your entire staff for exceeding their goals (hours on the sex toy) for the last month.  It was truly a commendable performance. I know these things do not happen without a great deal of effort on the part of everyone, and I want you to know how much we appreciate your hard work.  It appears that your emphasis on regular testing sessions has paid dividends (pleasure). Keep up the good work. We are proud of your entire team.