Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
The Evie ring is not being well received by most redditers. People are complaining of inaccurate steps, inaccurate sleep data, and poor temperature that leads to very basic menstrual,tracking, something that was supposed to be a feature. Movano may have figured out Liquidmetal but they have miles to go before they have mostly happy customers
Well said! None of the cash received by LQMT’s non earned revenues has ever helped to grow the earned revenues from parts sold. Thus never increasing shareholder value, but forever decreasing shareholder value. It is the only reason why the share price peaked on expectations to about 0.44 cents seven years ago and continues to decline to present day, taking a pause only, when LQMT releases a pr.
Good luck to you.
Surely, you jest.
You still bag holding?
Very few of the remaining bag holders refute that statement today.
I also stated unequivocally that the purchase of Lqmt by Luger li was a scam.
Looks also like they tweeked the casting formula to expand better to suit the expanding/contracting of the female digits. The ring also won many awards which of course gathered lots of attention in this rising female health industry. I would assume sales will increase.
Research & all,
I saw a low bid of .031 per share in 2023!
A low share price in the .03s was predicted by a "Hanging Dead Man" technical chart pattern that appeared and was pointed out by an electrically named poster to this board some 12 or so years ago!
FYI - Tomcat
The purpose of business is more than just having capital last, chippy. It is to have capital grow from net positive earnings. Please expand your vision of success and don't settle for bidenomics.
Put this in the context of LQMT….
Looking at the “Titans of Industry/Commerce” we see Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Walton, Jobs, Gates, Bezos, Musk plus or minus. What do they have in common?
They are “founders” of their industry
They are male (a hint)
They were/are obsessive with the task
They were very analytical
They were not fun people
They lacked “people skills” to mesh with society.
WAY out of my area…they may have been borderline/mildly autistic.
Where is this going? We have no “founder” to drive the process so the ownership of achieving success is a little less motivated. You can’t throw money at someone and create the same level of commitment that a founder has. No amount of bonus or stock options can get there…..this is a big problem.
ANECDOTE…Personal experience…I worked for a “founder owned/operated” company that started in 1935 (depression) and was successful in spite of the economy. After 20 years or so, it was decided that we needed “professional management” so we hired a raft of MBA’s who transitioned through the business (typical 3 years) …it was HELL. The popular term at the time was “Opportunistic Tourists” and you could rank commitment by where they chose to live. The company was headquartered about 20 miles from a major city and if they chose to locate in the city suburbs, they were less committed (options open) than if they chose to live closer. We sifted through manpower for about 2 DECADES before things stabilized…..chaos.
THE POINT…..We have no “Founder” with sufficient fire in the belly to make success happen and you can’t just go out and buy one.
I first invested in LQMT in 2014 and I have yet to see a profitable quarter and I see the next major milestone for the company is to reach breakeven. Any steps to lower the B/E bar is fair game….raise the rent, go for 4.5% vs. 4.0, increase sales, reduce travel…anything up to and including a car wash
.
Annual loss for 2023 was $2 million which is down from $2.3 million in 2022. Its trending down on a quarterly basis but SOOO SLOWLY.
”Surely somebody, somewhere, is making money from this cutting edge technology”
Metglas is the only company anywhere that is continually successful manufacturing and selling BMG.
Did not forget at all, but it is not the purpose of this business, or why I bought shares. California commercial real estate, debt securities, yada yada, there are better ways to do that. What is the accumulated deficit at this point? Must be around.$250 million. Where is the income from BMG and the IP, to finally establish a viable business? Surely somebody, somewhere, is making money from this cutting edge technology. For sure it isn't Valencia, and it isn't us. It seems to me that the well known conflicts of interest and our dependence on the Chinese interests are the elephant in the room. Somebody somewhere will call the shots on who gets what, not the free market we are accustomed to. IMHO.
You forgot $23 million @ 4% and the real estate appreciation….remember TC mentioned that the $7.8 million building has appreciated by 50-100% since purchase. Our cash pile could easily last 20 years. I won’t.
Will Tom Selleck do a $15 million reverse mortgage on an industrial building?
Excellent points. We have actually been in the business of equipment depreciation, and commercial property rental. Not to mention the real obsolescence of that equipment which last I heard is under tarps in Arizona. Far as we know, it has never produced any revenue.
Our 5 year agreement with EUCTECTIX is due to expire in January 2025. The royalty/commission schedule for this arrangement was 6% + 6% which looked good at the time but has yet to return a DIME. What is the value of free equipment storage for 5 years? …..at least we got the depreciation!
I would have rather have had outrageous sales at a lower percent return. We could be renegotiating the fees for the next 5 year term right now.
There has to be a simple explanation for why no terms are publicly in print or were discussed on the CC. Might have something to do with the share purchase. I detest speculation. Years ago it made sense. Not so much today.
I can throw another curve ball into this game…..9 month revenue for 2023 was only $224k so the uptick in Q4 was more like $280k…..how much of that increase can be attributed to the ring opportunity….no way to tell.
The trick is to reach valid conclusions with only partial input.
Based on those assumptions and LQMT’s numbers 40,000 rings may have been ordered.
A more accurate picture will have to wait for a PR from LQMT or Movano accounting for sales.
I say this only because $3 to $5 dollars per ring on approximately 4000 rings sold does not get LQMT to $127,000 earned as stated in the 10K.
Here it is no spin. 10K page 24 very clear and without any ambiguity. It is amazing when only a few read the 10K. No guessing required. Chipboarder, you are correct.
So if Movano sold X amount of rings. One then would get a fair estimate of what LQMT earns per ring based on the income they reported for those rings in the 10K. Would that be a fair way to nail it down? I think so.
From the 10K page 24…
“Revenue. Total revenue increased by $127 to $510 for the year ended December 31, 2023 from $383 for the year ended December 31, 2022. The increase was attributable to increase in product shipments primarily related to the launch of health monitoring rings utilizing our technology.”
It pays to do your DD. $127,000 dollars and the only guess work involved is the number of rings ordered. We can fairly ascertain that between 4000 and 4200 were sold. How many were ordered or what the terms are between LQMT and Movano Health requires more DD.
Chipboarder, your viewpoints on the earnings regarding the ring are spot on 100%.
My guess based on what Movano stated if the revenue is based on what is sold, is around $30 per ring. If it is on how many were ordered for manufacturing,then the earnings per ring are going to be less.
Either way, if the unknown terms of the agreement remains as is, this should be enough to stop the share price from heading down and to reverse the trend of the past seven years.
Meaning there is real potential for TC and LQMT to finally achieve LL’s goal for increasing shareholder value. Imo, once the share price increases to around 30 cents a share the floodgates of new investors will open up again.
This new potential should begin to increase trading volumes again and bring in new interest as the potential for LQMT’s share price is no longer speculative. Couple this with the expectations from TC for the year ending 2024 and hype will have added value as well.
That spells out quite well the normal order of things, but then there is LQMT and the maze. It sure seems like this ring business originated in the USA, and Valencia is writing it. What is to stop Yihao from over charging Valencia for manufacturing, and expatriating the dollars? Now I doubt that would happen for a pittance, but if this gets to be serious money, the various agreements’ we have with Chinese entities are vague and for that matter can be modified, canceled, or just ignored by the controlling interest. As expressed many times, LL is never going to sue EON or Yihao for performance. IMHO. But somebody is going to decide who gets what.
Your background is in fact very helpful. Mine is global M&A. Lots of different perspectives here, a good thing.
Now regarding the 10k and the ring. The rest remains factually unanswered. As only 3 customers are mentioned always without any accounting breakdown. Plus no new agreement regarding any compensation from a fourth major customer.
If revenues from a new customer impacts growth to the tune of 15% 20% or more and it is not reported in a 8K or as a normal event, then it has to be reported as an extraordinary event. Otherwise they got big problems head on with the SEC. Again, as some people assume they might be ignorant. I don’t believe LQMT would want to attract the attention of the SEC again. To assume that revenues are being received by a source unreported is beyond stupidity. Even if there were an NDA. It would have to be reported as such.
Imo. They may an agreement based on future sales and kinks to be worked on if any. But zero money at this time. Otherwise accounts receivable would be through the roof.
Yes that does answer the time a non invasive product part can be approved for production.
!
So no one checked! Maybe it would have been easier if it was stated the high was 0.09 and the low was 0.09 for the year 2023.
Almost certainly 5% in U.S
I did use the word “guessing” and the royalty/commission details of the manufacturing agreement haven’t been disclosed so we are going to pile assumptions on guesses on so it’s worth about nothing.
A typical manufacturing cost structure starts at 100%….of that 25%-33% represents the cost of raw materials…..another 25%-33% is labor and the remainder is G&A, profit and other. The “other” is where the commissions/royalties fall.
Here comes the guesswork….
If the application were to originate in China and sold in the US (our exclusive territory) I would expect something like 3%.
If the application were to originate in the US and sold in the US….I would expect 3% + another 3%-5% for the legwork.
The big guess is the selling price to Movano Health….I picked $25-$30 which represents roughly 10% of the selling price of $269 and probably 20% of Movano’s manufacturing cost …the electronics from OSRAM are probably 40%-50% of product manufacturing cost. The rest is G&A etc.
Recognize that I’m not an accounting person but my background is manufacturing engineering which may be useful.
How much does Yihao take for the manufacturing? And who decides who gets what?
Joshua used a number of $1 million/year impact on LQMT. Frankly, that may be light…It’s not beyond the possibility that Movano can sell a million units this year @ $269 or $269 million gross revenue. I’m guessing the selling price of the LQMT portion will be $25-30 per ring and our cut is $3-5 per ring. That could easily be $3-5 million.
Halve the numbers and it’s still monumental.
FYI…not really true about the 10Q…..the ring was included as the reason for the bump in revenue just below the Income Statement. See page 24 of the 10Q or my post 232147 on 3/15/2024.
Someone is in the background watching... Is loaded with Cash... Could Buy Move and LQMT at once !.... The A ring...
Apple would be inclined to let it go if: 1) They have no intention of making a ring; 2) They think it’ll handicap other ring makers such as Samsung and Oura; 3) It’ll test the American market for Liquidmetal and people’s response to it as a material (from a marketing perspective_do they care?), and 4) If it helps develop and strengthen the Liquidmetal manufacturing expertise, preparing them for truly huge jobs. Personally I think all four are the case.
Or Tony forgot and Lugee will be mad when LQMT gets sued.
LMFAO but another week passes….
It does answer the question of how long it can take from first meeting with a customer and getting a product to market. They must have Apple on speed dial to make it happen in a year. We all know it is a consumer electronics product until FDA approval and is somewhat an alternative to the Apple Watch. Apple must think small fish is no threat but they didn’t even drag their feet thinking about it. Weird.
Nowhere in the 10K is Movano Health or the ring mentioned. Although the company stated in the CC they worked on the project since 2022 and helped brought the ring to the market for sales to consumers.
More questions arise. No answers from TC.
Anyone...
Is this statement true? "During 2023, the highest bid price for our common stock was $0.09 per share, while the lowest bid price during that period was $0.04 per share."
Source: LQMT 10K. Page 16.
Anyone.
As Joshua said on Reddit, Q4 revenue seemingly from Movano is a $1 Million a year business. Of course that assumes that the initial rush of orders continues apace and could slow down if the 4Q numbers include Movano working ahead. We should also remember that Liquidmetal screwed the pooch with initial quality, perhaps not of their own fault since Movano was pushing them to move faster than possible, so I’m not sure how that affected cost and revenue since Liquidmetal may have had to eat the cost of failed products, pay for more processing and maybe molds or tests, and then push out more product.
Here’s what seems to me to be a decent opinion on the Evie ring.
No hype no spin. March 8, 2024.
https://www.mindbodygreen.com/articles/evie-ring-review
There are other opinions now out there. Some more con than pro. Can’t tell if there are motives other than straight forward thinking.
Another week passes and LQMT’s share price is up 17.61% from 0.051 cents to 0.05998 cents on extremely weak trading volumes and little interest. The same when LQMT moves up or down.
LQMT held a year end conference call Tuesday March 12, 2024. Two links were posted to listen to the CC.
No new contracts in 26 months. No 8K’s. Silence.
Progress? Up to anyone’s interpretation of the CC. If one just relies heavily on forward worded expectations. (Not always a good idea.)
So rather than going through the usual spot on boring rhetoric. (Thank goodness.) This week I will just reprint one of my recent posts which imo, seems to be in sync with this past week’s trading and the CC and a couple of paragraphs inline with my expectations from the week before.
I will save the 10k for another time.
(Thank heavens he spared us more boring BS.) :)
Posted last week:
Perhaps CEO, Tony Chung can correct this with frankness and transparency in areas he is permitted to talk. If there is anyone that has a clue to LQMT’s immediate future, it would be Tony Chung. Based on what he says or does not say, can change the direction of LQMT north or south of where it is. After all this is the season for the wearing of the green.☘️ :)
Regarding the upcoming conference call, be it a one way or two way call, TC, can state if any NDA’s fell through or if he believes any NDA’s may come to fruition within one or two years, without disclosing a company or the field they are pursuing. He should have no problem discussing issues with the ring.
From a recent post this week:
Researchfyi
Monday, 03/11/2024
“Getting back to LQMT. LQMT stayed in the 0.05’s today. A step up in the right direction. Now let see if TC can bring it home and step it up tomorrow with some meat from his position as CEO and increase the real potential to induce new investors to pop LQMT up from the abyss of below 0.10 cents.
It’s not about the bells and whistles of a glossy website with CE foldable hinges courtesy of China. It’s about the real potential. Not the hyped up one’s of theories. It’s not about the past failures of last year or the 21+ sales reps with their pockets empty turned inside out.
All know the drill. Small contracts equals modest potential. High volume contracts was the focus these past few years. High volume contracts brings home the bacon.
Shareholders have paid LQMT hundreds of thousands of dollars. The time to see potential for a real return on those investments are long overdue. Imo, from watching the liquidity and volumes and numbers of trades, the stock is dead. The time is now to instill new interest not new hope and new expectations, which never has panned out. Let see if TC can do it. He doesn’t need a question. He needs to step up and share the answers.
And he sure as heck doesn’t need my worthless opinions either. But what the heck, they’re always worth less than the price of a LQMT share. :)
Good luck to all in LQMT.
Wish TC LUCK.
Please try not to play kick the can again it didn’t end well for 2023.”
Perhaps in 2025 or 2026 LQMT might succeed and if they ever do make it in 2024, all in it will be very thankful and glad that they did.
Will this be the year revenues increase consistently? The 2nd, 3D, and 4th Q’s will tell. I’ll be pleasantly surprised if the 1st 10Q tics up.
Did TC’s forward worded commentary create new real interest in the stock to attract new investors or did the CC, recreate new real expectations and temporary hype? Everyone has to decide for themselves.
Good luck to all in LQMT.
Wish TC luck.
As for me, until it happens, (the annual expectations call,) it’s nothing more than a rosy outlook of the game Kick The Can.
Let the 10K be your guide and any new 8K of increasing revenues be the proof of TC’s integrity and the fruition of his comments be LQMT’s success this year and for years to come.
Anyone note today’s LQMT trading volume?
How about the number of trades?
🤔
Ring company tanks at EOD hitting record low.
I do not own stock in the ring company.
I bought a small position in MOVE not because of the EVIE ring but because of their unique approach of using radio frequency instead of infrared to measure various parameters. I’m more interested in oxygen, blood pressure and glucose for starters..Down the road I would like them to expand into male health…why ignore half the potential market? Targets such as blood alcohol (or TCH), testosterone, PSA and the enzymes associated with heart attack. LiquidMetal could be in the middle of all this because it’s transparent to RF energy.
I see MOVE as an acquisition target but I would hate to see someone pick the up for $3-$4 when the potential could be so much larger
I wonder why TC did not feature those numbers in his presentation. What it tells me is that there is reason to expect new product revenue flows through the first quarter and beyond if the product remains competitive. Steady flows in six figures......does a contract make.
I was a bit disappointed that TC didn’t provide an update on the Golf Venture with ATJ. .it’s been 2 years and there should be SOMETHING to say…even if it’s only “we submitted prototypes to a certifying agency and anticipating a response by year end”.
Our royalty is only 3% but if I remember correctly…we own 78% of LiquidMetal Golf so we get 2 bites at the apple.
Chip,
Good point!
Perhaps establishes a correlation between revenues to LQMT and volume of product shipped! It would an announcement of a license agreement!
Tomcat
The Q4 revenue of $286K was never attributed to prototyping fees or product sales but there was an interesting comment after the Income Statement…it points to the product sales.
“Revenue…Total revenue increased by $127 to $510 for the year ending December 31, 2023 from $383 for year ending 2022. The increase was attributable to an increase in product shipments primarily related to the launch of health monitoring rings utilizing our technology..”
Chip,
That is interesting. Perhaps the 4th quarter was affected by one or more lump sum one-time payments for prototype or R&D work?
Tomcat
And again ... you have been going to the same Baseball game for over a decade and demanding that there should be Goal Posts ...... and you insist that you will stay here until they put up the Goal Posts all around the baseball field so you can be gratified ... Who is the one with the problem ???
A casual observation….LQMT didn't break out the Q4 results in the financials BUT if you go back to the 10Q for Q3 you will see that the 2023 nine month revenue total was $224K. Comparing that to the year-end number of $510K says that the Q4 revenue exceeded everything YTD. This was definitely downplayed and designed to present the results conservatively….Hmmmj
Any idea what we should expect for 2025? Q1 revenues will be interesting.
You know it’s incredible in lieu of the small uptick and extremely low volumes and the many positive posts. I have to hand it to you. Your assessment is spot on.
No new contracts no 8K unless the $$$ involved has an impact on share price. Basically there still was no rabbit pulled out of the hat. Plus the constant put down of modest contracts vs high volume parts contracts in the past and now the innuendo that modest start ups are ok and high volume contracts from whales have too much oversight and or regulatory delays and are not so much on the front burner again.
The late great magician Houdini could never come close to the slight of hands LQMT just pulled off imo.
You either have a contract or you don’t. You either announce a purchase or you don’t!
Prototypes are a dime a dozen it seems. In LQMT’s case, less than a dime.
You want to talk about prototypes you rehire PH. Now there’s an executive who knew how to talk up prototypes. He had me sold.
You cannot have real potential increased by increasing the potential of forward worded commentary. 0 + 000 still equals 0.
Was the cc upbeat? Yes. Does it paint a rosy picture? Yes. Doesn’t it always? Yes. Do the 10k’s match? No. And it is the last thing that always counts. And if anyone doesn’t believe it. Then they have not been listening to TC’s CC at all.
Good luck to you.
Followers
|
880
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
1
|
Posts (Total)
|
232192
|
Created
|
04/30/05
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators PatentGuy1 |
Liquidmetal® Technologies (ISO 9001:2008 certified) is a leading force in the research, development and commercialization of amorphous metals. Our revolutionary class of patented alloys and processes form the basis of high performance materials in a broad range of medical, military, consumer, industrial, and sporting goods products.
Discovered by researchers at the California Institute of Technology, Liquidmetal alloys’ unique atomic structure enables applications to achieve performance and accuracy levels that have not been possible before. The revolutionary class of patented materials technology redefine performance and design paradigms institutionalized by traditional materials.
As Liquidmetal Technologies controls the intellectual property rights with more than 70 U.S. patents, these high performance materials are dramatically changing the way companies develop new products.
LINKS
Featured: Automotive Pressure Sensors, 9.36 billion market by 2020
1. LiquidMetal Website
2. LiquidMetal Manufacturing Facility
3. OTC Market Report
4. Engel Liquidmetal Forum (Nov 2015)
5. ENGEL Symposium 2015
6. ENGEL Interview on Liquidmetal
PATENTS (USPTO)
1. Search Crucible Intellectual (Apple and LiquidMetal R&D)
2. Search Apple and LiquidMetal
3. Search Cross-license Patents w/Eontec
4. Search Vitreloy
5. Search Pre-grant Patents
VIDEOS
1. OMEGA Liquidmetal Bezel
2. ENGEL e-motion 110T
3. Liquidmetal Bouncing Ball
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE - BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Professor Lugee Li, Chairman
Professor Li was appointed as a member of our board of directors in March 2016 and became Chairman of our board of directors in October 2016. Professor Li is the founder, Chairman, and majority stockholder of DongGuan Eontec Co. Ltd., a Hong Kong company listed on the Shenzen Stock Exchange engaged in the production of precision die-cast products and the research and development of new materials. Professor Li founded Eontec in 1993 and has served as Chairman since that date. At Eontec, Professor Li is responsible for strategic development and research and development. Professor Li is also the founder and sole shareholder of Leader Biomedical Limited, a Hong Kong company engaged in the supply of biomaterials and surgical implants. Professor Li serves as an analyst for the Institute of Metal Research at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and serves part-time as a professor at several universities in China.
Abdi Mahamedi, Vice Chairman
Abdi Mahamedi has served on our board of directors since May 2009 and became Vice-Chairman of our board of directors in October 2016. Since 1987, Mr. Mahamedi has served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Carlyle Development Group of Companies (“CDG”), which develops and manages residential and commercial properties in the United States on behalf of investors worldwide. At CDG, Mr. Mahamedi evaluates and supervises all of the investment activities and management personnel. Prior to joining CDG, Mr. Mahamedi founded Emanuel Land Company, a subsidiary of Emanuel & Company, a Wall Street investment banking firm, and served as a managing director for Emanuel Land Company from 1986 to 1987. In 1983, Mr. Mahamedi received his B.S.E. degree in Civil and Structural Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania, and in 1984 he received his M.S.E. degree in Civil and Structural Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania.
Isaac Bresnick
Currently serves as Legal and Regulatory Affairs Director for the Leader Biomedical Group, a private company based in Hong Kong and operating from Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and has served in that role since October 2014. At Leader Biomedical, Mr. Bresnick is responsible for the direction and management of legal affairs, regulatory affairs, quality control, and quality assurance, as well as for advising executive management of Group companies. Mr. Bresnick also currently serves as Director of AAP Joints GmbH, a private company in Berlin, Germany, and has served in that role since July 2013. Mr. Bresnick received his J.D. from the University of Connecticut School of Law in 2013, and his B.S. in Industrial Design from the University of Bridgeport in 2008. After completion of his undergraduate studies and continuing through his enrollment at UCONN Law, Mr. Bresnick worked as Senior Arrangements Designer for Electric Boat Corporation, a subsidiary of General Dynamics, from June 2008 to December 2012.
Vincent Carrubba
An experienced corporate leader and serial entrepreneur with extensive senior executive, technical and manufacturing experience. Mr. Carrubba has created and guided new products to success in the consumer goods, electronics, automotive and construction industries and has conceptualized, financed and built factories and developed new manufacturing technologies throughout Asia. From September 2014 through the present, Mr. Carrubba has served as the CEO of Admiral Composite Technologies Inc. (“Admiral”), where he has developed new technologies for environmentally responsible and innovative building materials which represent Admiral’s product lines. Mr. Carrubba has also served as Admiral’s Chairman since its inception in 2009. From September 2014 through the present, Mr. Carrubba has served as the CEO of Asia Sourcing & Communications USA Inc. and he has served as its Chairman since its inception in 2013. From 2002 through August 2014, Mr. Carrubba served as the Director of R&D for Interdynamics Inc., IDQ Holdings, where he was responsible for all R&D and QC matters, including the management of engineering, legal, patenting, regulatory, insurance and consumer relations matters. From 1989 through 1992, Mr. Carrubba designed and installed the New York Stock Exchange telecommunications and information technology systems. Mr. Carrubba has held engineering and executive positions with Xerox, General Electric, Bristol-Meyers Squibb and AT&T and he is the inventor of several patents related to telecommunications, professional tools and consumer products. Mr. Carrubba received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Engineering Science and a Bachelor of Science Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Columbia University SEAS in 1982.
Tony Chung
Mr. Chung was appointed to our board of directors in August 2017. Mr. Chung had previously served as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer from December 2008. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Chung served as CFO at BETEK Corporation, a real estate and investment subsidiary of SK Engineering and Construction, and as CFO of Solarcity, a company providing advanced solar technology and installation services. Mr. Chung is a Certified Public Accountant and served eight years at KPMG as an Audit and Consulting Manager for several large multinational companies. He received his B.S. degree in Business Administration from the University of California, Berkeley. Mr. Chung is also an Attorney at Law and received his J.D. degree from Pacific Coast University School of Law.
Reporting Status | U.S. Reporting: SEC Reporting |
Audited Financials | Audited |
Latest Report | August 4, 2020 10Q |
CIK | 0001141240 |
Fiscal Year End | 12/31 |
OTC Marketplace | OTCQB |
Market Value1 | $129,851,894 | a/o Sep 24, 2020 | |
Authorized Shares | 1,100,000,000 | a/o Dec 31, 2016 | |
Outstanding Shares | 914,449,957 | a/o Sep 24, 2020 | |
-Restricted | Not Available | ||
-Unrestricted | Not Available | ||
Held at DTC | Not Available | ||
Float | 487,690,350 | a/o Dec 31, 2017 | |
Par Value | No Par Value |
Shareholders of Record | 217 | a/o Dec 31, 2017 |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |