Airtificial (AI) (Inypsa + Carbures): Seguimiento de la acción

La verdad que no lo tengo muy claro el nivel de inglés y leguleyo no lo entiendo muy bien...

Da absolutamente igual, las pequeñas piezas que fabricaban del A380 se verán compensadas por el Hyperloop o mas allá. Seguramente.

O por muebles de diseño en FC, el Ikea de la FC.

O estoques.

O espinilleras.

Hay muchas cosas para hacer en FC y ellos son los reyes.

No os preocupeis.

Vuelven las oscuras golondrinas y, por el mismo instinto, la cabra tira al monte,

LO que pierdan los grandes del A380 se lo quitarán a los pequeños en otros programas.

Y tienen mucho que recuperar.

Pero esa da igual, TIENEN EL HYPERLOOP que se los quitan de las manos. ¿Quién quiere piezas de avión?

Ya se les paso la fiebre de los robots colaborativos...
Ahora hyperloop
Hasta otra llamada de bubucela...

La única manera de compensar los desastres económicos y financieros es ir creando noticias que animen a los samaritanos que pusieron pasta en la época dorada y mientras preparan a otros nuevos samaritanos.

si como pronostican algunos, las pérdidas seguirán cuantiosas así como el incremento del pasivo, sacan robots colaborativos, cápsulas y tubos, menean un poco los títulos y hasta la próxima.

A esperar las cuentas y los cuentos.

https://www.ladepeche.fr/2019/02/18/hyperloop-bientot-lheure-des-essais-a-toulouse,8022603.php

Transporte ,  Ciencia y Tecnología ,  Toulouse

Lo esencialLa primera pista de prueba de Hyperloop TT se está reuniendo en el centro de investigación y desarrollo ubicado en la antigua base militar de Toulouse-Francazal.

Siempre pasa algo en el aire o en Toulouse. Si bien Airbus anuncia el final de su A380, cuyas alas gigantes ahora le impiden volar, aquí está el tren del futuro que se hace cargo del ensamblaje de su primera pista de prueba.

Desde abril de 2018, los tubos de acero Hyperloop TT vienen de España (de Burgos a Castilla y León) por carretera. En la noche del 22 al 23 de enero, la cápsula de Vibranium, un material compuesto inteligente diseñado por Hyperloop TT (HTT), también fabricado en España (por la empresa Carbures en Puerto de Santa María) se entregó discretamente en el centro de Investigación y desarrollo de HTT en Francazal.

Estos últimos días, con la mayor discreción, HTT, deseando guardar el secreto de estos procesos de ensamblaje y fabricación, la primera pista de prueba de 320 m de longitud del tren del futuro se está montando en el sur del país. La antigua base aérea, se convirtió en un centro de actividades dedicado al transporte del futuro (Hyperloop, pero también el automóvil autónomo Easy Mile o los drones de Airborn Concept).

El tubo de 320 metros, en montaje, albergará las primeras pruebas.

Detrás de la antigua muralla de muros militares con alambre de púas que corre a lo largo de la avenida del general Joseph Bares en Cugnaux, al pie de la torre de agua de Francazal, se esconde hoy  un conjunto de varios tubos posados ​​y firmemente almacenados en el suelo. sobre placas de hormigón .

El conjunto, que aún no está terminado, fue ayer en forma de un largo tubo de ocho tubos de 20 m de largo, cada uno enganchado entre sí. Los trabajadores revestidos de amarillo estaban ocupados montando estos tubos de 4 metros de diámetro, que tendrían que circular a baja presión la cápsula, entregada en enero, que se movería por la fuerza electromagnética.

El montaje debe ser perfecto, completamente sellado, para que las primeras pruebas experimentales se realicen en este tubo de 320 m de largo. Se planea una segunda pista de 1 km, colocada sobre pilones a una altura de 6 m, una vez que la descontaminación pirotécnica (remoción de cualquier fragmento de bomba de la última guerra) se haya llevado a cabo a lo largo del eje principal de la zona D. 'actividades.

Los ingenieros de HTT, que están trabajando por el momento lejos de miradas indiscretas en la torre de control, mientras esperan la provisión de sus locales finales en el ex desastre de los oficiales no comisionados, podrán: Las semanas verifican in situ a través de este "tubo de ensayo" la eficiencia de sus cálculos para el momento virtual.

Transporte terrestre a 1.000 km / h.

La empresa de California Hyperloop TT (HTT) firmado el 24 de enero de 2017, un acuerdo con Toulouse Metropole, la Región y el Estado para establecer su centro europeo de investigación y desarrollo en la antigua base militar de Francazal, al sur de Toulouse . HTT, fundada por Dirk Ahlborn y Bebop Gresta, es una de las compañías que desarrolla el concepto de tren de levitación magnética de Elon Musk. Esto es en el caso de HTT, cápsulas poder circular más de 1 000 kmh impulsado por los campos electromagnéticos dentro de tubos de acero en la que la atmósfera está a baja presión, bajo vacío, Reduciendo la fricción y permitiendo una velocidad nunca alcanzada por el transporte terrestre, más de 1000 km / hy sin barrera acústica. En su proyecto, HTT planea transportar pasajeros dentro de una cápsula de 32 m de largo y 5 toneladas de peso, el espacio dedicado a los usuarios sería una cabina de 15 m de largo y 4 m de diámetro. De acuerdo con los diseñadores del proyecto HTT, HTT también está considerando el transporte de carga (un contenedor podría estar contenido en la cápsula), incluso si pocas cargas requieren esa velocidad de transporte. 33 empresas de Toulouse de la división Aerospace Valley están asociadas con el centro de HTT R & D.

Sigue el juicio sobre EMI.

https://cases.justia.com/new-york/other-courts/2018-2018-ny-slip-op-33028-u.pdf?ts=1544049467

Carbures Europe, S.A. v Emerging Mkts. Intrinsic Cayman Ltd. 2018 NY Slip Op 33028(U) November 29, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653892/2015 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12:02 P~ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART IAS MOTION -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x CARBURES EUROPE, S.A., SRT CAPITAL FF LLC, NEUDER GEDANKE, S.L., Plaintiffs, - v - EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC CAYMAN LTD., EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC, LTD., BULENT TOROS, ERIC MAASS, NOMURA PB NOMINEES LTD. Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x HON. SALIANN SCARPULLA: INDEX NO. 653892/2015 MOTION DATE 07/05/2018 MOTION SEQ. NO. 002 DECISION AND ORDER The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 002) 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50,51,52,53,54,55,56, 57,58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 were read on this motion to/for JUDGMENT-SUMMARY In this lending agreement dispute, defendants Emerging Markets Intrinsic Cayman Ltd. and Emerging Markets Intrinsic, Ltd. (together, "EMI") move, pursuant to CPLR 3212, for summary judgment. Plaintiffs Carbures Europe, S.A., SRT Capital FF LLC, and Neuder Gedanke, S.L. (collectively, "Carbures") oppose. Carbures is a publicly traded company, and EMI is a hedge fund. On September 25, 2015, Carbures and EMI entered into a Margin Lending Agreement and Term Sheet (together, "Loan Agreement"). Pursuant to the Loan Agreement, EMI agreed to loan Carbures €7 million, and Carbures pledged € 14 million worth of company shares as collateral ("Collateral Shares"). The Loan Agreement provides that the Collateral Shares are EMI' s sole recourse in the event ofloan default. In a separate agreement, Carbures 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 1 of 6 Page 1of6 [* 1] [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12:02 P~ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 additionally issued EMI a warrant to purchase Carbures stock at a discounted price under specified terms ("Warrant"). Section 5(c) of the Loan Agreement provides that, "[e]xcept under or after an Event of Default scenario or allowed as a hedge ... , the Collateral [Shares] will not be .. . sold or traded in any exchange or over the counter transactions." The Loan Agreement further provides that EMI "has the right to hedge Exposure in Shares using any strategy [EMI] deems suitable .... " 1 On October 22, 2015, EMI disbursed €3 million as the first loan installment, and Carbures deposited 6,315,810 shares as the first tranche of collateral. The next day, Carbures started to sell the Collateral Shares. On October 30, 2015, Carbures emailed EMI that it observed trading activity in contravention of the Loan Agreement. Although EMI responded that it was hedging the Collateral Shares pursuant to the Loan Agreement, the parties continued to dispute the propriety of Carbures' conduct. On November 4, 2015, Carbures demanded, inter alia, that EMI cease its trading activities and provide it with requested documentation. In response, EMI raised concern regarding Carbures' intention to proceed with the second installment, in which Carbures would deliver the second tranche of collateral, and EMI would loan an additional €4 million. As the parties' continued to espouse their respective positions and demands, EMI ultimately issued Carbures a notice of default on November 11, 2015. The parties 1 "A hedge is an investment to reduce the risk of adverse price movements in an asset." Hedge Definition, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hedge.asp. 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 2 of 6 Page 2 of 6 [* 2] [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12:02 P~ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 thereafter never completed the second installment of the Loan Agreement, and EMI proceeded to liquidate the Collateral Shares after declaring default. Carbures filed a complaint against EMI in December 2015. In 2016 I granted in part and denied in part EMI's preanswer motion to dismiss the complaint. That dismissal was largely upheld on appeal, thus Carbures' remaining claim is for breach of contract for allegedly trading the Collateral Shares in contravention to the Loan Agreement. In January 2016, EMI attempted to exercise the Warrant based on Carbures' purported default on the Loan Agreement. Carbures responded that the Warrant was not yet exercisable. In its answer, EMI asserts that its trading activity prior to November 11, 2015 constituted permissible hedging, and EMI additionally asserts a counterclaim for breach of the Warrant. Discussion "[T]he proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact." Smalls v AJI Indus., Inc., 10 N.Y.3d 733, 735 (2008). "Failure to make such primafacie showing requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers[.]" Smalls, 10 N.Y.3d at 735 (emphasis in original). Here, to make out a prima facie case for dismissal of the breach of contract claim EMI must show as a matter of law that it was hedging when it initially started selling the Collateral Shares. EMI argues that it was engaging in a hedging strategy known as the Black-Scholes option pricing model ("Black-Scholes"). Neither party disputes that Black-Scholes 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 3 of 6 Page 3 of 6 [* 3] [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12:02 P~ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 determines, through a series of inputs, whether to buy or sell the Collateral Shares, including the amount, to neutralize the risk. To demonstrate that it was hedging using Black-Scholes, EMI relies on its expert Stuart McCrary ("McCrary"). Review of McCrary's deposition testimony demonstrates that he is "only [opining] how [he] would hedge it" without any knowledge of the inputs, specifically volatility, that was used to hedge. McCrary Tr. 225:20-226:10. In addition, McCrary's expert opinion relies on some factual assumption that are inconsistent with the events at issue. For example, even though McCrary concludes that EMI had to sell 728,471 Collateral Shares from the outset to hedge the first tranche, it is undisputed that EMI only sold 61,718 Collateral Shares on October 23, 2015. To reconcile this discrepancy, McCrary postulates, without citing any factual support, that "the most logical explanation" for EMI underselling the Collateral Shares is that EMI "decided there was [only] enough liquidity to sell 61,000." McCrary Tr. 134: 16-21. For these reasons, McCrary' s expert opinion is insufficient, by itself, to warrant dismissal of the breach of contract claim. EMI also submits the deposition testimony of its managing director, Bulent Toros ("Toros"). Toros testified that in using Black-Scholes as a hedging strategy, EMI engaged in nondiscretionary trading. See Toros Tr. 41: 11-16. According to Toros, unlike discretionary trading, Black-Scholes determines whether to buy or sell the Collateral Shares. However, there is a dispute as to whether EMI sold less than it needed to neutralize its risk. This dispute raises an issue as to whether the trading was 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 4 of 6 Page 4 of 6 [* 4] [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12:02 P~ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 nondiscretionary under the Black Scholes model, or discretionary trading done for another purpose. There are other inconsistencies in EMI's proof submitted on this summary judgment motion. For example, Toros testifies that EMI was hedging both the loan amount and Warrant, but McCrary concludes that the volume of shares sold was far from adequate to fully hedge EMI' s exposure to the loan amount and Warrant. Compare Toros Tr. 199:14-21, with McCrary Expert Rep. 21. Because EMI's moving papers fail to show its entitlement as a matter of law to dismissal of the breach of contract claim, I deny the summary judgment motion. EMI additionally seeks summary judgment based on Carbures' purported lack of recoverable damages. EMI argues that Carbures may not recover excess proceeds because Carbures owes EMI €4.68 million from the first installment, and EMI only received €3,959,858.00 for selling the first tranche of Collateral Shares. EMI calculates €4.68 million based on the principal amount of €3 million plus interest on €7 million (totaling € 1. 68 million) that Carbures would owe on the maturity date. EMI argues that it could accelerate the principal repayment and interest after it declared default. However, given the existence of disputes as to the underlying factual allegations and which party is in breach, it would be inappropriate to determine the extent to which EMI may be entitled to interest. Based on the disputed issues of fact, I also deny EMI' s 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 5 of 6 Page 5 of 6 [* 5] !FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/29/2018 12: 02 PMI NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127 INDEX NO. 653892/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/29/2018 motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for breach of the Warrant. 2 In accordance with the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the motion by defendants Emerging Markets Intrinsic Cayman Ltd. and Emerging Markets Intrinsic, Ltd. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied. The parties are directed to appear for a pretrial conference on January 30, 2019 at 2:15 p.m. This constitutes the decision and order of the Court. DATE CHECK ONE: APPLICATION: CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: ~ CASE DISPOSED GRANTED 0 DENIED SETTLE ORDER INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN NON-FINAL DISPOSITION GRANTED IN PART SUBMIT ORDER FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT D OTHER D REFERENCE 2 I have considered all the parties' arguments, even if an argument is not specifically addressed in this decision and order. 653892/2015 CARBURES EUROPE, S.A. vs. EMERGING MARKETS INTRINSIC Motion No. 002 6 of 6 Page 6 of 6

¿los tubos son de acero?, había entendido que los hacia CAR y con muchos sensores.

Y, ¿que temperatura alcanzarán los tubos de acero en el desierto o entre Mumbai y Pune?

Bueno, hay que dejar a los técnicos que trabajen y ya veremos que resultado da.

Bueno 2, !!! espero que no sea otro rollo!!!

Y todo eso, ¿que significa?, ¿quién gana / quién pierde?

Bueno, hay quien gana : los abogados y CAR tiene a los mejores : PERRY MEISON

Descansan los trileros de movilizar unos millones de acciones con 4 euros. Era es y será previsible como lo es subirla con antelación a la presentación de resultados y otros cuentos prevista para el día 28, que será la de la cifra de los + y - 20.

De esa manera el impacto por el desastre la dejará por los nominales aproximadamente.  Si la dejaran en libertad con anterioridad, iria a los minimos históricos. Sera un placer leerles en el cuento y recuento RECURRENTE del dia 28.

¿28 de febrero?, a la vuelta de la esquina.

Pues habrá que ver que tal andan de números, pérdidas y deuda.

También habrá que ver que dicen de las delegaciones y/o del grupo.

Y por supuesto de lo acontecido en los últimos meses.

Creo que se desestima la contrademanda de EMI y se cita para pruebas periciales en 30 de enero, EMI establece que con la venta se quería cubrir de los riesgos, pero el caso es que vende menos de lo que necesitaba para cubrir esos riesgos, por lo que no parece lógica esa excusa. Por otro lado establece que no sabe a cuento de qué EMI solicita los intereses de lo quedaba por pagar por parte de carbures un total de 1.6 M.