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

[Muttley Snickers]

 

Normal human beings ?,

Good luck finding one of those.....

[Wytnucls]

Another battery test was conducted at Batteroo HQ in the presence of a Danish journalist:
'To test whether Batteriser now also works, we put a nearly empty battery in a small Brio trains and lit it. The train crawled forward across the railway tracks. We measured the battery to still have 1 V back and sat as the small Batteriser jacket on. And immediately popped off the train energetic start browsing.'

So, they do have a functioning sleeve, but as stated before, anybody could make one from readily available components. The challenge is to deliver on the outlandish performance claims made in their publications and statements. So far, no demonstration has corroborated such a feat.
As we know, the prognostic is rather grim.

[AmmoJammo]

Bob says deliveries in January now. Eternal optimist.
More accessible could mean they gave up on their own IC and went shopping on DigiKey. Good luck with 1.5A or even 500mA from a AAA battery then.

The butteriser webpage says that if you order now, they'll ship on 31st December.

That's pretty good going!

Design, prototype, test, and manufacture 10,000 butterisers in 11 days! With Christmas in the middle too! 

[SL4P]

10k units from China is doable.
QC may be dubious if they have only 'just' received the 'new' chips...
I wonder if any change was needed for the revised + terminal profile, as referenced in the Yahoo review...
Perhaps a new storage case?
Also shipping next week with no (as yet) published UL certification.

[Fungus]

Also shipping next week with no (as yet) published UL certification.

It never had a "UL certification".

UL just watched the GPS test from a distance and said "Yup, it's just like in the video". They didn't take anything apart, didn't check the wiring, nothing.

[drussell]

There is no reason for them to bother getting UL certification, CSA approval or any kind of safety certification except marketing wankery.  Battery operated devices like this don't require any safety certification. 

Now, as to whether they'd be smart to do some safety tests to attempt to be sure the thing's not going to burst into flames, that's another story!    I don't have any confidence at all in their abilities to properly test their own product given their complete lack of basic knowledge and understanding, willful ignorance or whatever their problem is, whether or not all this hokery-dokery that they're doing is intentional or not, given their previously released information (and lack thereof), claims and "test" protocols, etc... 

Simply clueless!!  (Or, perhaps, extremely brazen to try to fool people with such obvious quackery if they really do understand that their product is an impossible fraud...)

[drussell]

Since I can't comment on the IGG page, I'll do it here...



Gaaa!  Of course not!!  A Batteriser will make this kind of problem much more likely!

[drussell]

"more accessible" .... ?

What the bloody hell does that mean?

I assumed that means that their "prototype" design (whether this was really their own design, a modification to or custom version of an existing chip) couldn't be scaled/modified any time soon to deliver the kind of output current and general performance they need for it not to be considered a laughingstock.  My guess is they're going with some other, already available (more accessible) chip. 

My gut feeling has always been that there is only about 1% chance at most that they were actually really spinning their own chip design from scratch.

This whole sordid tale is just ...

[Fungus]

Since I can't comment on the IGG page, I'll do it here...



Gaaa!  Of course not!!  A Batteriser will make this kind of problem much more likely!

No, no, no.... Batteriser makes batteries completely safe!

[drussell]

No, no, no.... Batteriser makes batteries completely safe!

Oh, I'm well aware of their claims, I just don't believe them for one minute! 

It's supposedly taken them, what, 5-6 years to reinvent the LM2623 (which has been available for, what, 10+ years?)

What an absolute farce!!... 

[LabSpokane]

"more accessible" .... ?

What the bloody hell does that mean?

My gut feeling has always been that there is only about 1% chance at most that they were actually really spinning their own chip design from scratch.

Yup. They might be in the queue for a specific existing niche IC, which can have lead times of 40 and 50 weeks, but spinning their own IC is really a stretch.

[onlooker]

"Go with a new more accessible version" may just mean they gave up the 1.5A version (either due to no IC or realized it is not achievable), and went back to the 500mA version.

[EEVblog]

"Go with a new more accessible version" may just mean they gave up the 1.5A version (either due to no IC or realized it is not achievable), and went back to the 500mA version.

Seems like a likely scenario given that they are now promising (at least on Facebook) to ship by 31st Dec!

[SeanB]

Next update is the factory was in that complex that was damaged by a land slippage.

[Godzil]

Next update is the factory was in that complex that was damaged by a land slippage.

Don't give them idea like that!

[kalleboo]

Oh they'll ship by the new year... The Chinese New Year!

[coppice]

Oh they'll ship by the new year... The Chinese New Year!

A Chinese New Year

[f4eru]

I vote "Never"

[Godzil]

It's "Next Monday" when you mean never.

[g.lewarne]

It's "Next Monday" when you mean never.

Won't be delivered until Tuesday

[ChunkyPastaSauce]

So the problems with the patent continues; last Thursday patent examiner found the reconsideration arguments to the final rejection notice to be unconvincing (none of the claims they filed made it) and Friday, Batteroo filed for an appeal... the full appeal process takes 1.5-2.5, years and odds on average are not in favor.

Interesting Roohparvar saying Batteriser can function as a safety device. If I remember correctly,  that was one of the examiners arguments...that it could be seen as a safety device and therefore overlaps some other existing prior arts.

[Brumby]

Intellectual Property can be a bitch.


.... but sometimes it's satisfying to see certain parties get bitten in the bum.

[drussell]

So the problems with the patent continues; last Thursday patent examiner found the reconsideration arguments to the final rejection notice to be unconvincing (none of the claims they filed made it) and Friday, Batteroo filed for an appeal... the full appeal process takes 1.5-2.5, years and odds on average are not in favor.

Interesting Roohparvar saying Batteriser can function as a safety device. If I remember correctly,  that was one of the examiners arguments...that it could be seen as a safety device and therefore overlaps some other existing prior arts.

Hmm, so their delays could be at least somewhat influenced by their approach to patents...  Interesting... 

Links?

[EEVblog]

So the problems with the patent continues; last Thursday patent examiner found the reconsideration arguments to the final rejection notice to be unconvincing (none of the claims they filed made it) and Friday, Batteroo filed for an appeal... the full appeal process takes 1.5-2.5, years and odds on average are not in favor.
Interesting Roohparvar saying Batteriser can function as a safety device. If I remember correctly,  that was one of the examiners arguments...that it could be seen as a safety device and therefore overlaps some other existing prior arts.

Got to wonder how that affects any plans to sell the company? (That's usually the end game for the VC's)
No one will likely touch it without the patents.
1.5 years to appeal basically sinks the whole thing. They no longer have patents worth a penny.

[Brumby]

No one will likely touch it without the patents.

I couldn't agree more.

Who would buy a company/product without security on the very element of value in such a deal?