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.
This board has as many cobwebs as Sigma has developed over the years.
Look on the bright side folks. We can use Sigma as an example in reference to other possible companies that have a seemingly wide moat and potential in an emerging market and not able to convert the product in to sales. Absolutely Zero, Nada, zip. What a sad turn of events. I’ve finally let go of any hope.
A lifestyle company true and through now. Somebody take it out to the field and put it out of its misery.
Financial results are stunning:
Annual sales: $0.6 M down 70% from $1.7 M
Expenses: $9.0 M down modestly from $9.6 M
Sales over spending: 7%
Cash on hand: $2.8 M yr end 2022 down from $11.4 M yr end 2021
Wow!!
Stock is trading at $ 0.4 down from $400 in 2014
Market Cap $4 M.
How many employees earning a full time salary?
Who is doing tech support for all those partnerships?
Lots of talk of "collaborations" "partnerships" and "on product council" but no major CUSTOMERS.
Collaboration is just corpo speak for " customer who has a vague interest in our product but doesn't have enough faith to actually put the money in.
How long they got now before delisting and thus bankruptcy?
Sigma Additive Solutions Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2022 Financial Results
https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/NASDAQ/sigma-additive-solutions-SASI/stock-news/90648149/sigma-additive-solutions-reports-fourth-quarter-an
Kind vague, doesn’t mention resolution. Sigma biggest issue has been resolution. Now that they no longer control the hardware. They will need to have higher resolution, use more computing power.
Process health module webpage is up.
https://sigmaadditive.com/process-health/
They won’t use the technology as is. Easy question. How long have they been a “partner” exactly how many of Materialize customers requested the Sigma add-on, not enough to support Sigma and not many as Materialize has like 180 plugins. Sigma is just one of them.
Well, if they find it useful, and I think our opinions line up there, that they do appear to see the tech as useful, then yes, they may well exercise leverage to access it cheaply, but this doesn't necessarily mean they will simply use the technology without payment "software constructs are learned and hard to prove copyright."
Maybe they will buy Sigma. I mean, if the company had a market value of 100m, 50m, 25m, 15m...then I would think the odds might be slim, but if they see enough value in the technology to be co-presenting at AMUG with Sigma, (which builds upon a history of cooperative development, over time, that MTLS, not only Sigma, has not been silent about) -- and creating a record, of the tech's usefulness, with their own PR and website post of yesterday... then from multiple standpoints, in my opinion it could be worth a few million to MTLS to scoop up the technology that they have publicly identified as useful with their technology. In Materialise's words of yesterday..."Through collaborations with partners like Phase3D and Sigma Additive Solutions, AM users benefit from a technology-agnostic innovation that offers unparalleled insights into their 3D printing process for continuous improvement."
Also, in my opinion, and others' (3dprint.com "Dream 3DPrinting Mergers and Acquisitions: Who Will Buy/ Merge with Sigma Additive Solutions?"), Sigma could have value to other industry players. There are, of course, guarantees of nothing, but I'd not be surprised -- at all -- to see Sigma scooped up, particularly given its modest market value.
For any one initiative, Materialize (any significant company, in technology) has a dozen or more partners (usually small, so they can use cash to control) doing similar things at some point they thin the herd, and continue to do the same overtime.
Obviously you weren’t around for GE, America Makes and a dozen more companies/so called partners. “, not simply go it alone and take Sigma's IP for your use?”
Same argument used for any large organization, outsource anything you can especially if it is cheap and useful.
So, if you're a significant company working with Sigma, such as Materialise or Novanta, why, according to your perspective, not simply go it alone and take Sigma's IP for your use?
SASI has said they are moving away from hardware. Materialize will be providing/selling the hardware as part of their printers. IMO, Meaning the only things SASI has left is software, patents (which apparently no one needs) and consulting. Consultants can move to a new company without selling the old company. Software constructs are learned and hard to prove copyright.
<$1 for 180 days until 10 days over $1...
Does Materialise have the financial strength to purchase Sigma?
If so, their sensors could be sold to most of Materialise clients, right?
Stocks at 50 cents, market cap listed at $3 Million.
Is the company up for sale?
Are they servicing their products, software updates, field service etc?
IMO, Not really, the voting change was done to accommodate a less than beneficial to shareholders transfer of technology, without taking the company. This is just another step towards that.
More Materialise integration
https://ir.sigmaadditive.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/331/sigma-additive-solutions-and-materialise-deepen
Source of the info re the presentation is Sigma's newsletter
Actually, they do appear to be presenting with Materialise and Phase3D, another small AM QA firm...Of additional interest, check out the recent article on 3Dprint.com speculating about several companies, large and small, which, in the author's opinion, could be possibilities for a strategic deal of one sort or another, involving Sigma, Phase3D among them.
Good luck! Just looked on amug website and there not exhibiting.
No moolah for a booth methinks
Will be interesting to hear what kind of sunshine they are spewing next week at AMUG
Talent bankrupty.
Does no one else see what i'm seeing?
they furloughed multiple employees
they laid off multiple employees
multiple talented people have left and not been replaced
they have no CTO
they have almost no cash in the bank
changing there corporate policy so CEO and CFO get a nice cash bung if things go pearshaped.
people have spoken about there technology ( photodiodes). They mentioned in there last quarterly call they are ditching hardware to become a software only solution. So the value of all the millions they spent of investor money to develop the very best hardware has just gone to ZERO
The IP patents they have -- zero value
there only one forecast for PPS -- going to ZERO
RR1, the other message addressed the machine OEM's motivation for working for free with Sigma.
I first engagement with this field began around 2000, interactions with Prof Hamish Fraser at Ohio St and others active in metal additive manufacturing. I cannot really say any more, thank you.
Again, I appreciate your conversation, all the best!
$5 Million a year in cash burn from investors does pay a lot of rich salaries!
Where does the rubber hit the road?
You pose an excellent question, however consider this:
Sigma offers their quality sensor to BOTH Additive Industries (AI) and their clients.
Clients include several aerospace OEM's making a variety of parts.
AI then has to decide, should we work directly with Sigma, in house, or allow our clients to work with Sigma. Generally it takes machine mod's for sensor install, both hardware and software.
Now you see, AI can work with Sigma in house, thereby shielding their clients from any bad news that results from the collaboration.
So, when AI hears from their clients that they want sensors for quality, AI responds by bringing Sigma in house thereby shielding AI's clients from the dirty details.
that is the alternative reasoning for AI to engage with Sigma.
Cheers, and thanks for your messaging!
spot on regards the business relationship cycle,
beginning with expectations of technology advancement and demonstration,
followed by quite time, where nobody wants to discuss the challenges that form barriers to success.
exactly!
As far as Additive Printer Manufacturers are concerned after 20 years and there is still being “limited use” relative to other ways to manufacture. They need and will try anything to improve the perception of reliability for Additive considering the expected growth in Additive.
As far as Additive Printer Manufacturers are concerned after 20 years and there is still being “limited use” relative to other ways to manufacture. They need and will try anything to improve the perception of reliability for Additive considering the expected growth in Additive.
When it is a company’s only means of survival, They get as generous with free trials as they do with giving excess bonus shares for average work to employees.
In the specific case of Additive OEM machine manufacturers, in my opinion, it would in my seem to be an odd elective decision to cooperate in any form of partnership, including on a free trial basis, with a company which very has as its purpose insuring quality/identifying mistakes and problems associated with the machines you produce.
These larger companies often have the same initiative with many smaller companies. In these initiatives or channels, each small company (mainly at their on expense) are to do a POT (Proof of Technology) or POC (Proof of Concept), to proof out their technical approach. One of the reasons one hears about the start of an initiative, is the larger company’s initial interest, but often does not hear any afterwards is the smaller companies are weeded after a period of time and even though there may still be a relationship it is not enough of a relationship to move forward with the smaller company, but rather than announce the end of the partnership, it dwindles to the point, only the small companies still talk about the relationship.
Jack, Is it your thinking that the OEMs who have identified themselves as partners of Sigma are similarly misinformed? While their indications of working with Sigma on an optional basis (optional for the customer), don't cost the OEMs money, it certainly doesn't seem to be a flattering or credibility-bolstering circumstance for the OEMs to indicate any sort of cooperation with a company that has as its purpose identifying the mistakes that the OEM's equipment produces. Why, especially if you're an EOS or an SLM, (that is, at the top of the pack) -- have anything to do with Sigma?
Also, would be really interested to know -- if you're willing to share -- what connection you may have to the industry.
Thank you
RR1, appreciate you insite. thank you for that!
Your sense is that these insiders are convinced of the contrast or differentiation that the Sigma Photo Diode has over competing other sensors on the market.
I often ask, what distinguishes a product from the competition?
Since AI cannot distinguish IPQA, from competing sensor systems, their choice of a PD sensor must be the fundamental aspect of IPQA that provides a barrier to entry or an obstacle for the competition.
With all respect, IMHO, their choice of PD sensing is weak, alternative sensor choices and perhaps sensor fusion will likely prove far superior to the Sigma Labs choice of the PD sensor.
cheers and all the best investing.
IMO, It has been more than a decade and they are still trying to figure out if they are a company with a product or a consultant company. Neither has ever even come close to providing an acceptable revenue stream.
In my opinion, (as an investor who's not a technologist), the sort of technical question you're raising is likely answered (at least to my personal satisfaction), by the attachment to the company of 1. Mark Ruport (followed by) 2. Jacob Brunsberg (followed by) 3 Stephan Kuehr.
While their involvement doesn't prove that Sigma's technology will be successful...as the fate of these small companies is likely never knowable until things fully play out, to my satisfaction such industry insider affiliation and attachment makes a fundamental shortcoming of the technology, such as you seem to suggest as a possibility, unlikely.
Kayna, absolutely correct.
However, Sigma did not invent AI, their invention is an in-situ sensor, a photodiode based sensor. Sigma and others are using AI to find relationships, correlations between sensor signals and deposit quality. So, Sigma's competitive advantage, if they have one, is its sensor, not the integration of AI. All modern, current sensor work, now includes an AI element, as the 3D printing community needs a quality sensor.
So, this is the question, does Sigma have the right sensor with its PD-based system?
Let's see what the market says!! cheers
another talent leaves.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/brett-diehl-6bba74116/recent-activity/
AI together with dominant German machines = amazing
AI will change the situation significantly!
JGault, can you summarize, please?
Pref stock, warrants, stock is at 58 cents, market cap is $4 Million.
Do they have any cash on hand?
Q4 earnings report is coming, date for that?
Cloudy days.......
I've already lost.
Item 3.02 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
On January 26, 2023, Sigma Additive Solutions, Inc. (“we,” “our,” “us,” or the “Company”) agreed to issue to a holder of 132 shares of the Company’s outstanding
Series D Preferred Stock (the “Preferred Shares”) a five-year warrant to purchase up to 225,000 shares of common stock of the Company at an initial exercise price of $0.58 per
share, the closing price of the common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market on such date, which exercise price is subject to adjustment in the event of a stock split,
reverse stock split and similar events. The warrant was issued in consideration of the holder’s agreement to convert, in full, the Series D Shares in accordance with their terms
into 270,828 shares of common stock, which equates to a conversion price of $0.58 per share. The warrant was issued without registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, in reliance on the exemptions from registration under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Act”), and Rule 506(b) of Regulation D under
the Act.
Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.
Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Of icers
As previously reported, on July 1, 2022, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company adopted certain compensatory arrangements of our named executive
officers, including a retention bonus plan and a change in control plan of Jacob Brunsberg, our Chief Executive Officer, Frank Orzechowski, our Chief Financial Officer and
Darren Beckett, one of our other named executive officers, whom we collectively refer to in this Report as the “Participating Executives.” The change in control plan
contemplated that the Participating Executives each would be entitled to a cash payment equal to his base annual salary in effect on July 1, 2022 if his employment is
terminated “without cause” within 180 days following a “change in control.” At a meeting of the Board on January 24, 2023, upon the recommendation of the Compensation
Committee of the Board, the Board determined to modify the change in control plan to provide that Messrs. Brunsberg and Orzechowski each would be entitled to a cash
payment equal to two times his base annual salary in effect on July 1, 2022, less any base salary payments received between the date of the “change in control” and the
termination date, if his employment is terminated “without cause” within two years, rather than 180 days, following a “change in control.”
Also on January 24, 2023, the Board approved the form of Retention Bonus and Change in Control Agreements with each of the Participating Executives
memorializing the retention bonus plan and the change in control plan as modified as it relates to Messrs. Brunsberg and Orzechowski as described above. Upon the
recommendations of management and of the Compensation Committee, the Board also approved the grant to the non-employee directors, officers and key employees of the
Company under the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan of nonqualified stock options to purchase an aggregate of up to 433,665 shares of common stock of the Company.
The stock options will have an exercise price of $0.58 per share, the market price of the common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market on January 26, 2023, and will
otherwise be on the terms and provisions set forth in the Company’s standard-form stock option agreements for non-employee directors and officers and other employees.
Item 8.01 Other Information.
Workforce Change
As previously reported, the Company believes the additive manufacturing industry continues to evolve and that there is also a trend toward consolidation in the
industry as companies align for profitability. The Company continues to believe alignment with a strategic partner may allow for common growth, vision, and funding of the
Company to achieve its mission, as well as an opportunity for other strategic relationships, including potential acquisitions that can further accelerate the execution of our
digital quality vision. In this regard, the Company recently furloughed several of its workforce to conserve its existing cash while it considers possible strategic or financing
transactions.
Anti-dilution Adjustments
The Company’s outstanding January 2020 warrants to purchase up to a total of up to 516,400 shares of common stock and April 2020 warrants to purchase up to
383,306 shares of common stock, respectively, at exercise prices of $2.50 per share contain so-called full-ratchet anti-dilution provisions that are triggered by the sale or
issuance of common stock or common stock derivatives at an effective price per share below the exercise price of the warrants, including the recent stock option grants
described in Item 5.02, above. As a result, the exercise prices of the warrants will be reduced to $0.58 per share and the number or shares purchasable upon exercise of the April
2020 warrants will increase to 1,648,302.
If you look at linkedin it doesn't look good.
Darren Beckett - CTO is now looking for work as is Roger Frye.
Lots of other long serving people left.
Alberto Castro - senior applications engineer - looks like he has been there from the beginning. Now working for Xerox.
Luis Aguilar - appications engineer - had a few years there. Now at meta.
Richard Proctor - applications engineer - there for number of years. Now at mark3d
Leander Wilcke - technical sales engineer - there for a few years - now at UL
When you look at the makeup of the employees there's a lot of sales and not a great deal of technical.
not if they go broke and you lose all your investment
Word on the street is layoffs have begun.
They should be running short of cash in Q1, 2023.
What do they do when they run out of cash?
They spend far more investor cash than from clients!
With stock trading at 58 cents, their market cap is about $6 million?
If they raise $5 Million by selling stock, won't that crush the stock price to 20/30 cents?
Yes, it has certainly been an almost 2 month no news snooze... where is the:
-Lockheed martin?
-Process health module?
-Corporate funding partner?
Followers
|
484
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
81999
|
Created
|
01/17/11
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
The Company:
Sigma is a software company that was founded by scientist-engineers composed of physicists and metallurgists then working at Los Alamos National Labs for the entrepreneurial purpose of developing sophisticated metallurgical products. Since 2016, the Company’s focus has been on solving the complex and challenging problem of how to best assure the high quality of metal parts manufactured in laser powder bed additive manufacturing, or 3D printing, machines. Sigma and many others believe that until this problem was solved, 3D manufacturing of metal parts would not be scalable enough to grow past prototyping and mature into a major industry enjoying high quality yields and cost-efficient production runs. The solution that Sigma developed to solve this problem is In-Process-Quality-Assurance (“IPQA®”) software known as PrintRite3D®.
In 2018, the Sigma team enhanced and added user features to its PrintRite3D® technology. In 2019, the Company began to productize and test PrintRite3D® on various 3D metal printers at customers’ sites through the Company’s Rapid Test and Evaluation (“RTE”) program. Upon receiving favorable responses from the various RTEs, in 2020 the Company began to aggressively market PrintRite3D®. However, the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic caused a reduction, and in some cases a freeze, in capital spending within the Company’s targeted industries and had what the Company believes to be a short-term negative impact on the Company’s expected timing of generating meaningful revenue. Despite the pandemic, the Company moved forward with its plan to market PrintRite3D® to the following industry segments: (1) global manufacturing companies with Additive Manufacturing (“AM”) initiatives; (2) 3D printer Original Equipment Manufacturers (“OEMs”) for purchases of licenses and generating fees and royalties thereafter; (3) additive manufacturing software venders for alliances and licenses for co-sales; and (4) research foundations, standards organizations and universities, all in service of Sigma’s potential for setting the industry standard of measurement by providing data and analytics as a metrics-based quality standard of metal quality for all 3D laser powder bed manufactured parts, notwithstanding the design, metal, or brand of equipment upon which parts are manufactured.
Additive Metal Manufacturing and the role and need for Sigma’s technology:
The use of 3D printing technology dates back to the 1980s for polymer applications, but the ability to print functional parts from metal alloys has spurred significant interest and investment into AM over recent years. AM is now reshaping the product design process, entire supply chains, and the vast landscape of manufacturing. Engineers are embracing new design freedoms to realize valuable product performance improvements and cost efficiencies with lighter weight, better thermal management capability, better fluid mixing, customization, and/or the ability to make different structures and textures that yield better part integration.
We believe that there are several significant hurdles to be overcome for broader adoption of additive technologies for the production of industrial metal parts. Among these are lack of quality, consistency, and industry standards along with cost. The Company believes PrintRite3D® has the potential to contribute to widespread industrialization of 3D metal printing. Additionally, the disruption in complex and rigid supply chains caused by COVID-19 exposed the country’s vulnerability to shortages in times of crisis. In response, manufacturers are devising strategies to be able to be more agile, increase their ability to manufacture mission critical parts on demand, with more customization, and closer to where the end part will be needed.
PrintRite3D® Technology and Product Family:
PrintRite3D® is an integrated hardware and software edge computing platform, or in-process quality assurance system that combines inspection, feedback, data collection and critical analysis. It is a 3D printer platform-independent solution that can be installed as a retrofit to an existing 3D printer or requested as a factory option from select 3D printer OEMs. PrintRite3D® provides a high-fidelity, accurate system that can confidently scale to multi-laser 3D metal printers. The PrintRite3D® system detects potential anomalies and incorporates machine learning in conjunction with developed metrics to map those metrics to the post-process data. This provides the ability to reduce post-production testing and costs, while creating a certification framework that serves the needs of end-users, printer manufacturers, and standards organizations.
PrintRite3D was initially developed to work with industrial 3D metal printers using the Powder Bed Fusion (PBF) process, which is the most widely used process for industrial metal applications. In 2020, we announced PrintRite3D for Direct Energy Deposition, or DED, for metal parts. PrintRite3D DED opens up another segment of the industrial metal market for Sigma to sell and distribute our technology. In 2021, the Company introduced PrintRite3D Selective Laser Sintering, or (SLS) for polymer materials. The polymer market is larger and more advanced than the metal market. There is an increasing need for quality and standards within the polymer market to support mission critical parts such as those being used in aerospace, space exploration, and defense. The Company’s entry into this market was customer driven by a supplier of critical equipment to the space exploration market. The Company believes that PrintRite3D’s ability to work across a different 3D printers, processes and materials gives it a competitive advantage and will help accelerate the adoption of 3D printing for industrial applications.
Distribution Methods:
Sigma Labs employs a multi-channel distribution model for its IPQA products including a direct sales force, value added resellers (“VARs”) and 3D printer Original Equipment Manufacturers (“OEMs”). In 2021, the majority of the Company’s revenue was generated by direct sales in North America and Europe. VARs are currently used in Japan and India. The Company plans to extend its VAR channel outside of North America and Europe. Since 2020, the Company has moved aggressively to establish and extend relationships with 3D printer OEMs and began to generate revenue from this channel. The revenue generated by the OEMs in 2021 did not meet the Company’s projections due to several reasons, including but not limited to: (1) the ramp up time for the OEM’s sales force, (2) the ongoing impact of COVID on our European based OEM partners, and (3) the lack of OEM sales into select vertical markets (e.g., aerospace and space exploration) that require that parts conform to specific quality standards. We expect that the percentage of the Company’s revenue coming from OEMs will increase in 2022 and beyond.
The Company markets its products through webinars, email and social media campaigns, and participation, both in person and virtually, in industry events and tradeshows. In addition, the Company collaborates with international standards organizations in the establishment of standards for AM.
Competition:
PrintRite3D® is a third-party, agnostic In-Process Quality Assurance system designed to provide a consistent, standards-based measurement and prediction of quality across a heterogeneous collection of 3D printers. Competition has been primarily from the printer OEMs who offer their own monitoring system, usually as a separately priced option to its printers. Sigma believes that the future of AM will consist of factories with various generations of printers from various manufacturers. The primary reasons that global manufacturers will have machines from various vendors is that certain machines and technologies are better suited for different applications than others. Additionally, as the industry progresses, innovation will accelerate, and new leaders will emerge. Finally, many believe that there will be a consolidation of 3D metal manufacturers and the number of vendors will decrease from approximately 50 to a much small number over the next decade. Although standards for monitoring are slowly being set by various international standards organizations, it is highly unlikely that printer OEMs will modify their monitoring systems to work with other OEMs machines. Therefore, we believe that the only way to produce parts with a consistent level of quality is with a third-party, agnostic, standards based IPQA system, such as PrintRite3D®. Over the past year or so, new competitors have entered the market with monitoring technology that follows Sigma’s lead as a 3rd party agnostic system capable of working across 3D printer machine types. These systems use camera-based technology and machine learning to identify gross defects during the printing process. These solutions are useful; however, they fall short of determining root cause, and unlike PrintRite3D, are not capable of instructing the printer, through closed-loop control, to vary certain machine variables such as laser power to avoid creating the defects.
Intellectual Property:
We regard our patents, trademarks, domain names, trade secrets, know-how, and other intellectual property as critical to our success. We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, trade secret, other intellectual property law, confidentiality procedures, and contractual provisions with employees, partners, and others to protect the technology and other proprietary rights, information and know-how that comprise the core of our business. The chart below summarizes our issued patents. We are currently prosecuting foreign and U.S. patent applications related to our IPQA® technology and rapid qualification of additive manufacturing for metal parts. There is no guarantee that the patent applications we have submitted will issue or that if issued, they will offer adequate protection under applicable law.
Sigma Labs, Inc. Patent Portfolio as of December 31, 2021 | ||||||||||||
Jurisdiction | Granted | In Process | Total | |||||||||
US | 13 | 16 | 29 | |||||||||
PCT | - | 3 | 3 | |||||||||
EP | - | 4 | 4 | |||||||||
Germany | 1 | 7 | 8 | |||||||||
China | 1 | 4 | 5 | |||||||||
Japan | - | 2 | 2 | |||||||||
Korea | - | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
Total | 15 | 37 | 52 |
Title | Type | Patent No. or Application No. | Expiration Date | |||||
Methods and Systems for Monitoring Additive Manufacturing Processes | US Utility | 9,999,924 | 5/11/36 | |||||
Systems and Methods for Additive Manufacturing Operations | US Utility | 10,207,489 | 6/20/37 | |||||
Material Qualification System and Methodology | US Utility | 10,226,817 | 4/26/37 | |||||
Material Qualification System and Methodology | China Utility | ZL201680010333.X | 1/13/26 | |||||
Optical Manufacturing Process Sensing and Status Indication System | US Utility | 10,317,294 | 5/2/35 | |||||
Systems and Methods for Measuring Radiated Thermal Energy During an Additive Manufacturing Operation | US Utility | 10,479,020 | 8/1/38 | |||||
Optical Manufacturing Process Sensing and Status Indication System | US Utility | 10,520,372 | 3/25/35 | |||||
Systems and Methods for Additive Manufacturing Operations | US Utility | 10,717,264 | 12/28/38 | |||||
Systems and Methods for Measuring Radiated Thermal Energy During an Additive Manufacturing Operation | US Utility | 10,639,745 | 2/21/39 | |||||
Photodetector Array for Additive Manufacturing Operations | US Utility | 10,786,850 | 2/21/39 | |||||
Multi-Sensor Quality Inference and Control for Additive Manufacturing Processes | US Utility | 10,786,948 | 4/24/37 | |||||
Optical Manufacturing Process Sensing and Status Indication System | US Utility | 11,073,431 | 3/25/35 | |||||
Method and System for Monitoring Additive Manufacturing Process | US Utility | 11,135,654 | 8/11/35 | |||||
Layer-Based Defect Detection Using Normalized Sensor Data | US Utility | 11,072,043 | 1/26/40 | |||||
Systems and Methods for Measuring Radiated Thermal Energy During an Additive Manufacturing Operation | Germany Utility | 112,018,001,597 | 8/1/38 |
Recent Developments
In January 2022, we announced the foundational elements of a three-year plan that we believe will increase the Company’s ability to achieve its mission of setting the quality standard for additive manufacturing. The combined strategies are geared at making our technology more consumable in terms of ease of use and cost by end users, both for initial purchases and expansion opportunities, making it easier for original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) to embed our technology and generate attractive revenue streams for the OEM, and finally increasing the Company’s gross margins by moving towards a software-only solution.
To lower the barrier for initial users and for expansion opportunities within end users with a large number of printers, we began offering our current PrintRite3D integrated hardware and software solution on a subscription basis. The impact of the change will currently reduce the initial upfront cost to a new user from over $100,000 to approximately $3,000-$4,000 per month. In addition, we believe the subscription model will smooth out the Company’s revenue and cash receipts while making them more predictable.
In order to expand the number of OEMs distributing our technology, we launched a three-tiered OEM program directed to: (1) new OEMs without their own quality assurance or monitoring solution; (2) established OEMs with a quality monitoring offering, but who have customers with multiple printers from multiple OEMs and want a single 3rd party quality and analytics solution with consistent quality metrics across printers, processes and materials; and (3) OEMs building open APIs to integrate components of Sigma’s proprietary technology with their current offerings. We are now working with OEMs on their next generation printers to offer a software-only solution that will utilize the printer’s computing infrastructure and dramatically reduce the overall cost of its technology, enabling the opportunity to move towards a software only embedded solution on every printer sold by partner OEMs.
The combination of subscription pricing and the software-only embedded OEM offerings are intended to make our technology more affordable to acquire and easier for OEM’s to bundle, distribute and support in an effort to become the industry standard. The shift in our business model has had an impact on our near-term revenue growth as we increase our focus on building strategic partnerships, expanding our partner ecosystem, and ensuring the success of our existing customers as they move into production. However, we believe these changes will contribute to faster adoption of our product by end users and will result in more predictable and profitable revenues over the longer term.
Key Second Quarter and Subsequent 2022 Highlights and Business Update
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |