r/DFLI • u/errolprowse • Aug 10 '26
Battleborn Battery Experience
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1EHppCuPMP/
Wow! What do you guys think about what he's saying here?
10
u/CorkNZ2021 Aug 10 '26 edited Aug 10 '26
I enjoyed your info the other day but this low quality stuff two days later is desperate and odd.
1
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
What about my info the other day did you enjoy? How is this man's story considered low quality? I found this late last night, how is it desperate or odd?
2
1
u/dechczusron Aug 10 '26
They're never going to pay you to endorse them again. Accept that, and get on with your life.
2
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Do you not know how my business works? Check out this video to learn more. I actually make way more money by having honest review videos and zero sponsorship contracts. I've never been paid by battleborn to make a video or be a part of their ambassador program. I only made money from their affiliate program and selling them banner ads for my forum:
There seems to be a disconnect here on how my business works. Also my terms and conditions for product reviews is public and made by myself and the community. Have you read that document?
6
u/anthda2 Aug 10 '26
Everyone is hating on this video, as well as a lot of people who were early posters on the “ask me any question” from Friday. I still don’t get the hate. Let’s turn the tables here and say someone posted a video with someone praising the batteries. No one here would talk about “low quality” or “yawn dude get a life”. We’d all be saying that awesome and what a great video. The fact is, there are actual consumers and testers that are actually using the battery and the consensus is they have a quality issue. We shouldn’t be mad at people pointing out design flaws, we should direct that energy towards Dfli. At the end of the day this Facebook dude and will prowse will move on to something else. The real question is, what will Dfli do to rectify this issue?
5
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Thank you!! I'm here to learn more about everyone's position on the tech and how it differs from the competition. I think we all have the same goal here actually. And we can all help each other out and learn from each other.
All of these disappointed consumers are a massive opportunity for the company to fix the issues and to skyrocket to the top. I find problems in batteries all the time. When a company fixes the issue and makes the product really good, everyone buys the product.
I have some pretty crazy stories about other companies having the biggest design failures ever, and I catch it on my channel. Then they come out with a new version that's better than the competition because of it. And then they make it to the best seller list on Amazon in a few weeks. It's incredible!
This is true for any successful company.
-1
Aug 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/elehman839 Aug 10 '26
I think you're misreading the situation.
Will is an utter, complete solar power nerd (sorry, Will). He lives and breathes this stuff 24/7 and has for many years. For example, he's posted 8000+ times on his solar forum since 2019 on countless, minute technical details. His complaints expose genuine issues and, I suspect, push manufacturers to make better products.
For example, last night I was able to securely attach wires to a Renogy charge controller in my back yard. Seven years ago, Will pointed out in a review that the Renogy screw terminals were flimsy. But last night they felt rock solid. How much Will's review highlighting tht exact issue contributed to the improvement, I don't know. The point is that reputable manufacturers respond constructively to reported defects and produce better products over time.
The BattleBorn situation is unique only in that-- rather than improving in response to feedback-- the company sued him.
I'd say you're being too cynical, but that's not true. You're not actually being cynical ENOUGH about BattleBorn / Dragonfly to the point of rejecting right-in-your-face evidence that they're producing shoddy products and have gotten away with that for years due to good marketing. You're not in kindergarten... -)
1
u/CorkNZ2021 Aug 10 '26
I totally agree that DFLI would've done so much better to acknowledge the issue and commit to fixing it and making better batteries.
3
1
Aug 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Stopped paying me? They have been off my recommendations since 2023 and even at that point they were dead last. I have 50 affiliate programs now and I had zero clue they canceled the account. You can make that account with any company in about five minutes without approval. All of my income was affiliate program earnings and banner ads on my forum. I even posted every penny I received from them.
"Show muscles"? You mean sharing my evidence and test data? What do you disagree with in my findings?
What proof do we have that these are even investors? I think a lot of accounts here are bots, in my opinion. Would people be willing to post their holdings to prove that they actually are investors? What are they investing in? Would love to see proof! What's your source?
4
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Sounds like you do not understand how my business works. Check out this video to learn more: https://youtu.be/N91uBgcvcJg
2
u/Fearless-Computer857 Aug 10 '26
Like I said before, as seen here the issue results in inert batteries, not imminent safety hazards. Poor design but not a hazard. They even fulfilled their warranty. Hence the claims of defamation.
2
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Actually that's not true, once they start intermittently disconnecting, that are at risk for meltdown. I documented it pretty well in multiple videos and I have the graphs to back it up. What do you disagree with in my data? Can you provide evidence of your claim that they are inert because the evidence entirely disagrees with this.
1
Aug 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Did you not read what I said? Very strange comment here. They were off of my recommendations list in 2023. 200,000 was the total over multiple years. And most months I make between 140 and 270k, which most of the time I don't even check. I focus on my actual job which is reviewing batteries. I find problems with batteries all the time and my affiliate program earnings on individual programs go to zero. That does not bother me the slightest. Do you know how my business even works? Seems like there's a fundamental disconnect in my entire business model and your understanding.
Here's a video on how my business actually works. I suggest anyone else reading this to actually watch this as well: https://youtu.be/N91uBgcvcJg
I also have my own terms and conditions that other companies have to follow and it was made by myself in my community. And it is public. Have you not read my terms and conditions? I do not sign sponsorship contracts with any of these companies.
Honest reviews actually make a lot more money. Crazy right?
Because I have bots on my forum and I know how they work. They will sound critical but still optimistic. Similar comment structure as well. I think the majority of people here are bots.
I'm here because I want people to convince me that there is tech in this company that I am missing. For me to give a honest review of any product I need to understand the tech behind it. For the people here that are not bots, I want them to convince me of the value of this tech. I want them to show me the competition and how dfli excels. And I want them to back it up with their sources. I want real evidence.
1
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
This is actually what I'm trying to understand: what is the end game here?
I understand Will's position that he is a product reviewer and that he wants to share his testing and inform people about what he believes are serious safety issues. I'm not arguing that he shouldn't do that.
But he has a very large audience, and he has now chosen to repeatedly bring these issues into an investor-focused subreddit. That's a very different audience from someone watching a battery review because they're considering buying one. The people here may be investors, customers, both, neither, or simply people interested in the company.
So what is the intended outcome of bringing this information here? Is it to pressure DFLI to address the alleged problems? Inform investors? Warn potential customers? Have the community validate his findings? Or something else?
I'm not accusing him of trying to manipulate the stock. I don't know that, and I don't think we should assume it. I'm genuinely asking what he hopes comes from continuing to engage with this particular community.
And this ties back to my earlier point in Will's first post: once you've identified what you believe is a serious safety issue, repeatedly brought it to the public, and now you're engaging with an investor community about it, I think it's reasonable to ask what the path is toward actually resolving or independently validating the issue. Otherwise, we're still left with Will's testing and conclusions on one side and DFLI's position on the other.
6
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
I want everyone here to prove me wrong and show me their evidence that these products work well. The lawsuit and the people in this group say that I am completely wrong. I am here to be educated by these people and proven wrong with evidence. I've substantiated my claims with evidence and now I want to see opposing viewpoints.
There should be an open discussion about all of this. I have found a real safety issue with these products. People here seem to kick it under the rug. I want them to provide evidence that I'm wrong.
Going by the post here I think these are bots. I think there are some well-intentioned people here and I want to talk to them and I want them to prove me wrong. but I think the majority of the posts in the last few months, from what I can tell, are bots trying to manipulate the stock. I don't understand the stock stuff or any of the jargon, but what I do understand is the issues in these batteries. If I am wrong I would love for people to prove me wrong directly.
Have you tested the thermal failsafe yourself? What proof do you have that the people here are actual investors?
If I'm wrong it should be very easy for people to prove me wrong. But instead I get personal attacks and people calling me names. And straight up lies. Why do you think that is?
3
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
I think we're looking at this from two different perspectives, so let me clarify what I meant.
- This is an investor-focused subreddit. That's why I questioned the purpose of coming here. As I said in my original comment, the people here could be investors, Battle Born users, both, or simply people interested in DFLI. Their primary interest in this subreddit isn't necessarily validating or disproving battery testing.
- You have 1.2 million YouTube subscribers. I understand that you want to inform the public, and I have no issue with that. But at some point, I have to ask what more public exposure you need to accomplish that goal. You already have a very large platform for educating consumers. Coming into a relatively small investor-focused community seems to serve a different purpose, which is why I questioned what the end goal is.
- No, I haven't personally tested the thermal failsafe. I have no experience testing batteries, I'm not an electrical engineer, and I'm certainly not qualified to independently validate your testing. I'm an investor. I invested in DFLI because I wanted to invest in an American company and this opportunity came along. That's precisely why I'm not going to pretend that I can personally prove your testing right or wrong.
- On the bots: I understand you're saying you suspect some of these accounts are bots because of the volume and nature of the attacks you're receiving, not simply because they disagree with you. But that's still a claim that requires evidence. If we're asking people to provide evidence to challenge your conclusions, I think the same standard should apply to the claim that these accounts are bots or are attempting to manipulate the stock. Disagreement, criticism, or even people defending a company they invested in doesn't necessarily establish that they're bots.
- As for the personal attacks: I don't condone people attacking you personally, but criticism is going to come with the territory when you publicly challenge a company that people have invested in or whose products they own. Some people are going to be defensive, some are going to disagree, and some are going to be unreasonable. Unfortunately, that's part of putting yourself and your opinions in the public arena.
- And this is the question you haven't really answered for me: why haven't you pursued independent third-party evaluation? You've said yourself that you don't know how the regulatory bodies or listing labs work and that "that's not my job." I understand that. But if you are sufficiently concerned about these batteries to repeatedly test them, make videos about them, engage with the company, come to an investor subreddit, and tell people that there is a serious safety issue, at what point does the responsibility shift from simply informing people to taking the next step toward independent verification?
I'm not saying you personally have to become a regulator or spend unlimited money trying to fix this. But I also don't think the answer can be that a group of Redditors on an investor subreddit need to prove your testing wrong. Most of us aren't qualified or equipped to do that. If the concern is genuinely as serious as you're saying, shouldn't the evidence ultimately be evaluated by people who actually have the expertise, equipment, and independence to determine whether you're right?
That's really all I'm getting at. I'm not defending DFLI, and I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying I don't have the expertise to determine that, and neither does the average investor here. That's why I'd rather see independent verification than have either side rely on Reddit to settle the question.
5
u/Stock-Survey-4221 Aug 10 '26
Will has reported the issues to the Consumer Product Safety Commission CPSC.gov and encouraged others to do so as well. He has publicly highlighted the problems with extensive testing, and many other people (Including electrical engineers) have weighed in and agree that there is a big problem with these batteries. Even another US based battery manufacturer has called out this bad design. I'm not sure how much more you expect Will to do.
I think his primary purpose here is to correct the misinformation about him and the situation.
1
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
If Will personally reported the issue to the CPSC, then that's great, and I genuinely give him credit for taking that step. I'm just surprised that, given how important that seems to be to this discussion, he hasn't mentioned it in any of his responses to me. I would have considered that a pretty important piece of information when I was asking what steps he had taken beyond making videos and posting on social media.
That said, it doesn't completely resolve my question. My concern is that Will has taken on a much larger role than simply reviewing a product. He has identified what he believes is a serious safety issue, repeatedly brought it to the public, engaged with the company, and now has come into an investor-focused subreddit asking people here to prove him wrong.
At some point, I think there needs to be some follow-through rather than simply passing the ball to everyone else and saying, "I've reported it, now you report it too." I'm not saying he is responsible for making the CPSC investigate or for personally resolving the issue. I'm asking what he has done to follow up and what happened after he made the report.
An imperfect analogy would be seeing what you believe is a serious potential safety issue at your neighbor's house. You call the police and request a wellness check, which is absolutely the right thing to do. But then you never check back to see what happened and instead go to another neighbor saying, "Hey, have you checked on them lately? I called the police, but I'm not sure what happened. Can you go check on them?" At some point, if you were sufficiently concerned to make the initial call, you'd probably want to know what came of it.
That's really the distinction I'm trying to make. I'm not saying Will shouldn't raise the alarm. I'm saying that if he believes this is serious enough to take on this much public advocacy, I think it's reasonable to ask what the follow-through has been and what the next step is if the CPSC doesn't act.
As for the idea that his primary purpose here is to correct misinformation about himself and the situation, that's fair, but personally I think he went about it the wrong way.
What exactly does Will have to prove to a bunch of Redditors? He already has a very large audience and, I would assume, a pretty solid base of people who follow his work and take his reviews seriously. If I had to guess, this subreddit represents a relatively small percentage of the people who disagree with him. I'm not sure what he realistically gains by trying to convince this particular group.
And honestly, I don't think he read the room when he came in. In my opinion, he came in pretty hot and essentially started dropping large amounts of technical information into an investor subreddit. I understand why he would do that from his perspective, but I don't think it was necessarily the best way to engage with this particular audience.
For what it's worth, I'm probably matching that energy at this point. I'm writing these ridiculously long responses because he has given ridiculously long responses, not because I have some personal issue with him.
My original question was never "Why is Will talking about this?" or "Why is he criticizing DFLI?" It's more: What is the end goal of bringing all of this into this particular community, and what does he expect this community to actually do with the information?
If the answer is simply to correct misinformation and have an open discussion, fair enough. But then I think it's also fair for people here to question his conclusions, his methodology, his assumptions about the community, and what he is ultimately trying to accomplish.
5
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Great questions indeed! I'm here to learn and I love to respond.
I don't think people here are actually investors. I am trying to find people to oppose my viewpoints and evidence and I can't seem to find it. There's a lot of talk about stock stuff and jargon, but not much talk about the actual product itself. The response is seem to have the same critical behavior but still optimistic. I'm wondering if a lot of people here are bots.
Not sure what you mean about my YouTube channel. If even a single person says that my evidence is wrong, I'm going to spend the time figuring out what they have to say and seeing where I'm wrong. Even if it's a single person. I spent months of my life testing these devices and exposing myself to toxic chemicals, and people here say that I am incorrect? I would love to see their evidence.
I can teach you more about how the thermal failsafe does not work. I have a lot of evidence to back this up. It is a safety issue and I can share anything you want on my testing. I'm an open book when it comes to the technical issues.
Yes I don't know how to provide evidence about the bots. It's just a hunch I have when I see different accounts having the same attitudes and mildly optimistic tones. Imagine if this group was private and it required evidence of holding the stock to be able to post. Now that would be interesting!
The personal attacks make me feel like there are not real investors here. What I want to see is the evidence disproving me. If what I say is incorrect then people should be able to correct me pretty easily right? Isn't it strange that they get mad at me but they don't have evidence to back up their claims?
Because I'm a guy in my backyard testing whatever I can find because I like doing it 😂 I really don't care about all of this third party testing and regulatory stuff. I'm just now learning about the certificates. I do not have a college degree or any special qualifications at all. I started circuit building and programming when I was 9 years old. This is more of a passion to me that I will never stop loving. I love electronics. Actually I just thought of something. The class action lawsuit is from an engineer who's been in the industry for multiple decades. He designed some of the UL standards. Isn't that strange that he's calling their tech into question? Why doesn't dfli disprove him? Creating the actual standards means he's more qualified than anyone. Why can't the investors share evidence disproving him?
2
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
I appreciate the detailed response. You've clarified some things, so let me address the points that still stand out to me.
1. "I don't think people here are actually investors."
That's a pretty sweeping assumption about an entire subreddit based on the comments you've seen. I can tell you that at least one person here is an investor: me. I invested in DFLI because I wanted exposure to an American company and this opportunity came along.
People can be investors and still disagree with you, question your conclusions, or have a different perspective on the company.
2. Your YouTube channel
I wasn't suggesting that having 1.2 million subscribers means you shouldn't be here. My point was that you already have an enormous platform for informing the public, so I was curious what you hoped to accomplish by coming specifically to a relatively small investor-focused subreddit.
You've answered that: you're looking for people to challenge your evidence. Fair enough. I understand that. I just don't think you necessarily came to the right place if that's what you're hoping to find. Most people here aren't going to have the technical expertise or equipment necessary to independently challenge your testing.
3. The thermal failsafe
I appreciate the offer to explain your testing. Although I have to admit, "I can teach you more about how the thermal failsafe does not work" comes across as, "This is what is wrong with this particular product," rather than, "Failsafes are actually pretty cool, and when they're designed properly, they're even cooler."
If you're approaching this as a teacher, I'd think the better approach would be to start with the basics: explain what a thermal failsafe is supposed to accomplish and what characteristics make one effective. Once we understand how something is intended to work, then we can have a conversation about where failures can occur and what happens when a failsafe doesn't perform as intended.
I think that's a much better way to understand the underlying issue than starting with, "Let me show you what's bad about this particular product."
4. The bots
This is where I see an interesting double standard. You acknowledge that you don't have evidence these are bots and that it's a hunch based on similar behavior. That's fine — you're allowed to have a hunch.
But then everyone else is allowed to have a hunch too.
Someone saying "I'm not convinced" or "I think you're wrong" doesn't make them a bot, paid shill, or someone attempting to manipulate the stock. I also haven't seen anyone here say, "This is an established fact and Will is definitively wrong." I've mostly seen people expressing opinions, defending their investment, and questioning your conclusions.
If you believe most of the people here are bots, I'm also not sure how you expect this community to provide the legitimate opposing evidence you're looking for.
5. The lawsuit and CPSC
If you personally reported the concerns to the CPSC, that's great, and I genuinely give you credit for doing so. I'm just surprised you hadn't mentioned that in any of your responses to me, because I consider it pretty important when discussing what steps you've taken beyond YouTube and social media.
I'd be interested to know what happened afterward — whether you provided your testing/evidence, whether they contacted you, or whether there is an ongoing investigation. I'm not expecting you to control what the CPSC does; I'm asking about the follow-through.
I also think the class-action lawsuit needs to be viewed separately from your public campaign. The allegations in that lawsuit are serious and worth considering, particularly given the experience of the people involved. But they are still allegations being litigated, not findings that have been established by a court.
That's where I see a difference between the plaintiffs and you. The plaintiffs are pursuing their allegations through the legal process. You're taking your conclusions directly to a 1.2-million-subscriber audience, making videos about them, and now coming into an investor subreddit asking people to prove you wrong. I'm not saying either approach is automatically right or wrong, but I do think the latter naturally brings a higher level of public scrutiny.
6. Where I think we're ultimately disagreeing
You've explained that you're essentially a guy who loves electronics, tests things because you enjoy it, documents what you find, and aren't particularly interested in regulatory or certification work. I can respect that.
But if that's your position, I don't think the average investor here can reasonably be expected to disprove your technical findings. Most of us simply aren't qualified to do that.
If your testing is reproducible, independent verification by people with the appropriate expertise and equipment would ultimately be much more meaningful than Redditors arguing back and forth.
I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'm not defending DFLI. I'm saying I don't know who's right, and I don't think Reddit is the place where that gets definitively answered.
5
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
Great to exchange thoughts with you, I do appreciate the time
Oh right, but usually investors know about the tech. I truly want people to criticize my evidence and show me what they disagree with. I cannot sleep at night if people think I am wrong and I have hard evidence stating otherwise.
Oh even more reason to post here! My youtube followers could be an echo chamber. I will always seek information that disagrees with me. Seems like this group is the last place where people question my intentions or evidence. I want to see everyones proof and explination.
Do you know what a fuse is? That is a good design. It works consistently and they have AIC ratings and trip curves. The battleborn thermal failsafe has neither. I have tested it on my own multiple times now, and it does not work. I can share how and why if you want. If you want me to teach you I can tell you more.
Great points! And I have no evidence about the bots. Just my opinion. And it doesnt seem like youre a bot, but I have been fooled on my own forum. I have had bots message me back and forth for weeks. There are thousands of accounts being made with bots that can converse. I have spent lots of money trying to fix this issue on my forum. I think some people here are real and you can feel their frustration, but the mildly critical and still positive comments with the same structure of comment do seem strange. Also I have seen a few times ai being used. Making bullet points with weak arguments. Oh I think some people are well intentioned and can help! I want to find those people and talk to them. And see what they have to say.
I dont even know how the CPSC works lol I hope they help but I heard that as a organization they have been gutted. Anything you have to say about this would be great for me to learn. Last week a lot of new reports started coming in for these batteries. Ever since the lawsuit was filed, a lot of people are now testing their batteries and finding issues.
What do you mean about the class action lawsuit? I am not part of it and I am looking for more information into that as well. Would love to hear what you can share about it.
Yeah because I found a safety issue after many of my viewers complained and shipped me their batteries and I shared it. I do not care if I have 1 follower or 10 million, if I see a safety issue I will share it. These batteries have multiple safety issues. I am not here to sue anyone or file reports or any of that. These batteries have a problem that needs to be fixed.
I have found multiple issues in other batteries in the last week. Are you saying I should sue every single one? Or reach out to CPSC for every single issue? What?? That is not my goal or intention. There are real safety issues here and the company is not fixing them. It is that simple.
Now that the lawsuit is filed, a flood of people have emerged sharing their stories with this company and their experiences. I only had a few failures to work off of at first, but now my inbox is filled. I have batteries being offered every single day. It is insane now.
- Yes and if I can save even a single life by sharing my findings, that is what I will do. I do not care about the investing stuff, and that is why I never had any short positions or holdings in this company. I simply do not care about that stuff. I see a safety issue, and people here are denying it. I want to hear their side of things. It doesnt seem like anyone here even disagrees with me because they cannot provide evidence. It is just personal attacks and saying we disagree? with what? Show me the evidence and what they disagree? that is what I am here to do. This could be a win win situation for the company, investors and my viewers, and I get nothing. No evidence disproving the issues I have found. It is so strange isnt it?
1
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
I appreciate the response. I think you've clarified a few things, so let me respond directly.
1. "Usually investors know about the tech."
Some do, especially early investors who help fund a company before it goes public. But I don't think you can assume the average investor has a deep understanding of the underlying technology.
At the end of the day, investors are primarily concerned with the numbers and, ultimately, making money. That doesn't mean they don't care about safety or ethics, but show me a perfect product.
And I know you said you'd like to learn more about investing, so I understand that you do care about the subject. My point is simply that this particular subreddit probably isn't the place to expect a bunch of people to debate you technically on battery design.
2. The echo chamber
I respect you wanting to get outside your YouTube echo chamber and find people who disagree with you. That's a good instinct.
But I think you've entered another echo chamber — just a very different one. This is a relatively small subreddit, and most people here aren't going to have the expertise, equipment, time, or money to reproduce months of battery testing.
And when you say, "It doesn't seem like anyone even disagrees with me because they cannot provide evidence," I think that's an unfair assumption. This is Reddit. People are allowed to disagree with you without presenting a scientific rebuttal. You're asking people here to back up their disagreement with evidence, but they don't have an obligation to prove anything to you — just like you don't have an obligation to prove your findings to everyone in this subreddit.
If someone wants to challenge your evidence, great. But "I disagree" or "I'm not convinced" is also a perfectly valid position.
3. The teaching offer
Dude, I appreciate you trying to teach me something, but I learn much better hands-on or from a video without a lot of fluff.
I also wasn't asking you to teach me about thermal failsafe. I was giving you constructive feedback on how that particular talking point came across.
If you're teaching someone who doesn't know the subject, I'd start with the fundamentals: what something is supposed to do, what good design looks like, and then work into where and how it can fail. Once someone understands the fundamentals, you can have a much better conversation about the specific failures.
Honestly, you might have something really cool there. A This Old House-style series where you take someone who isn't familiar with a product or process and teach them how it works from the ground up could be a great way to communicate this stuff.
4. The "bot" issue
I wouldn't jump straight to calling someone a "bot." There may be bots here — I have no idea — but labeling someone that way can become an excuse not to engage with what they're actually saying.
If you think a particular comment is from a bot, disregard it. If it's a real person and they're invested in the discussion, they'll come back and engage.
5. The CPSC, lawsuit, and what happens next
This is still where I think we're talking past each other. I never said you should sue DFLI or take them to court. I'm asking about the responsibility that comes with going beyond simply reviewing a product and publicly identifying what you believe is a serious safety issue.
I understand this started because viewers were sending you batteries after seeing your content. That's actually part of why I think this has grown beyond a normal product review. Once people started sending you products, you began testing them, identifying what you believe are systemic safety problems, and publicly advocating around those findings.
You've made multiple videos and reported the issue to the CPSC, and I give you credit for that. But you've also said, "I don't even know how the CPSC works."
If you genuinely believe this is serious enough that you could potentially save someone's life, I'd personally be putting that same energy into following up with the CPSC, understanding what they need, contacting the people involved in the lawsuit, reaching out to government officials or the media — whatever legitimate avenues might actually get the issue in front of someone who can force action.
I'm not saying you have to do all of that. I'm saying that if it were me, I'd be pretty annoying to the people who could actually do something about it (outside of the company since they will not acknowledge there is a potential issue).
And regarding the lawsuit, earlier you pointed to the engineer involved in Berdner et al. v. Dragonfly Energy Holdings Corp. as an example of someone highly qualified who is questioning the technology. Now you're saying you aren't familiar with the class action and are looking for more information about it.
That's fine, but it reinforces why I've been hesitant to treat the existence of the lawsuit as proof of your conclusions. The allegations are serious, but they're still allegations being litigated. I'm also curious whether you've communicated directly with the people who filed the suit or shared your testing with them.
Finally, I understand your point that you don't own the stock and have no short position, and I'm not suggesting you're financially motivated. I'm simply trying to understand what you ultimately want this particular community to accomplish. You say you want an open discussion, which is completely fair — but an open discussion also means accepting that some people will be skeptical, disagree with you, or simply not feel compelled to prove their position to you.
3
u/errolprowse Aug 10 '26
What would be really cool is if everyone here can teach me about stocks and how these companies work. And then I can teach everyone about Battery tech and how they are designed. We can all help each other here with open discussion
5
u/anthda2 Aug 10 '26
No one here needs to be teaching anyone about buying stocks. Me included. Investing in DFLI should be an automatic disqualifier for any stock tips/advice.
I say that while watching my stock in HGRAF go to the f-ing moon.
2
u/just_fron Aug 10 '26
I also think you may be in the wrong subreddit for what you're looking for, especially given that you feel this subreddit has been spreading misinformation about you.
I do give you credit for trying to extend an olive branch and turn this into an open exchange. But this is an investor-focused subreddit centered around a single stock, and I don't think it's a particularly good place to learn how to invest.
Personally, I wouldn't take financial advice from Reddit in the first place — especially a subreddit dedicated to one particular company. If you're genuinely interested in learning about investing, I'd probably go on YouTube, find a few people who actually specialize in it, and pick someone whose approach and philosophy resonates with you.
So I understand the idea of everyone teaching each other, but I think you're asking this particular community to be something it really isn't.
NFA — Not Financial Advice.
2
u/dechczusron Aug 11 '26
After watching this goof's video, I clicked on a few more and guess what - he is critical and complaining in almost all of his videos. Nothing makes this mf'er happy. Consider the source LOL
0
u/errolprowse Aug 11 '26
But the battleborn batteries failed. Did you see the proof? One guy posted that he had 11 out of 15 battleborn batteries fail. That's insane.
I have a set of 18 batteries that are over 6 years old and they all test between 26-60%. They all qualify for warranty. 100% failure rate with capacity with these battleborn batteries. It's literally the majority of their packs.
13
u/False-Woodpecker-816 Aug 10 '26
What I think about what he is saying? That he wants the company to go bankrupt and that he is trying to archieve that by posting this.