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.
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.
I’m guessing that offering has already closed, with a 25% and growing profit in hand.
And no hold period. What a deal!
This didn’t follow the normal 2 days of exhilaration, followed by profit taking back down the hill. You could argue that yesterday was a day of healthy consolidation, market caught its breath, and closed with it up another 25% today, this weekend there are going to be a lot of eyes looking at what happened this and wondering what’s it’s about. We could see a resumption next week with new money coming in (at least early in the week) with volume.
Volume was down a bit today, it also would have been a day to take the week’s profits. Yet up we went again. This whole week felt more like accumulation than a day traders’ battle, pullback were orderly and short in duration.
Agreed KCCO that anything short of several million tucked away courtesy of the ATM would be inexcusable at this point.
With no news to sustain/support this, I do expect to see the requisite hit piece published somewhere by a short player who thinks they can take advantage of the huge run up and lower volume/interest to drive a sharp decline. It almost always happens, and it may be great time to add some shares because a rebound will come. There is just too much steady buying interest to believe that it is one off run based on one positive blog. And if there is significant cash added to the coffers, that is a huge weight off of the share price.
Enjoy the weekend.
If the CFO has any strategic sense, they NR tomorrow morning a financing strategy that takes them well into 2025.
If only…
Any bets on who’s selling (hint At The Moment)?
At 6:25, a nice summary of POET by an MIT EE with 300k followers that knows how to talk to investors.
You guys know my inherent skepticism, I think what is confirmed here, that wasn’t entirely understood elsewhere, is that the light source is an external component, not integrated within the fabric. I know that sounds obvious, but for some reason it was not universally accepted.
So it makes sense to demo with an established technology, the FAU, versus one that might not be fully tested to the standard they may require, also demonstrates the flexibility of supply for external power source. Starlight might be the best option, but it will always be just that, an option, as technology always advances, it will have to evolve to remain relevant in an always competitive technology ecosystem. And CAI’s demo was for their Photonic Fabric, not POET’s Starlight.
POET hasn’t shown anything this past week that addresses the financial elephant sitting on their chest, That is all that matters for now.
Agreed, it’s all about the money now, how they thread that needle without diluting us into oblivion remains to be seen.
It looks like Multilane will accelerate the 800G to market, I don’t know if they will be able to handle volume beyond samples.
Yep KCCO, thanks for posting that, under “Competing business” in the glossary, it does specify sale of 400G optical engines within the territory is SPX’s.
“Optical engines for 100G and 200G applications will be sold exclusively world-wide by SPX. 400G optical engines will be sold by SPX in the China territory while the Company will sell 400G optical engines to customers in the United States, Europe and elsewhere outside the China territory. Volume production of optical engines and packaged light sources designed for specific customers with high volumes is expected to ramp in mid-2024”
100/200G applications are legacy products and I believe the above addresses to 400G pretty clearly. Applications beyond that, 800G, 1.6/3.2T, if they incorporate 400G optical engines? Clear as mud. But the fact the POET suggests manufacturing its own 800G+ transceivers seems to imply that anything incorporated to achieve that level and higher remains in their purview. I’ll guess it will end up being contracted to SPX at a renegotiated cost+ rate per OE versus the at-cost agreement for everything at 400G or less. To do otherwise (POET contracting with someone else) would be a lose-lose.
Question: If POET has technology that demonstrates a clear path to 1.6T and beyond, and a market cap of a mere $60 million, why has no one from the white hot datacom or AI sectors made an attempt to buy the company at these levels and accelerate commercialization and development of their photonics integration technology platform? It appears to be well past proof of concept and already in the process of diverse commercialization.
It would seem to be a low risk, high reward proposition. Are industry experts ignorant of the potential this technology is purported to offer? Is the technology not as elegant in function as has been stated, have competitive advances in photonics integration surpassed those of POET ?
Given their relatively short cash runway, and with no revenues of their own, (any revenues forecasted will be booked by their joint venture with Sanan IC, SuperPhotonics) it’s past time for the company to explain how they plan to either achieve positive cash flow, or, if needed, to fund operations to that end.
An exceedingly tolerant investor base deserves answers.
To be clear, I have no expectations at this point. They have a short leash of their own making, any further financing they need will have to come on merit, the promise pool has been drained. Broad or deep (large client, big commitment) and transparent acceptance are mandatory.
Maybe we will learn more here. Janet Chen, Meta will be part of this panel.
https://www.ofcconference.org/en-us/home/exhibition-and-show-floor-programs/show-floor-programs/next-generation-optical-interconnects-for-ai/
Nice to see that Vivek liked this Celestial AI job posting on LinkedIn last week for a Process Development Engineer:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ankur-aggarwal-8b283510_another-great-opportunity-to-join-our-growing-activity-7159025385584689152-zN9z?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
Looks like judge has denied Cisco’s motion for a delay. Trial set for April. Might hasten settlement attempts.
I saw your post KCCO, there was a reference to a jerk in the Off Topic forum and I’d bet you triggered an algorithm that put two words together and that booted you. I thought your posts there were always informative and truthful. But I agree you are not missing anything, lots of mis/dis information over there.
Funny guy stockman. You brag about in at 90 out at 115, now that it’s at 125, it’s a pump and dump? Play your book somewhere else.
I expect to see some wild swings based how far and how fast this fell. We’ll know more next week how the offering went. But when that dust settles, its revenues and industry recognition that will matter. So far we’ve only heard, but have not seen. That has to change. And I don’t want to see chest thumping from management for what should have been resolved months ago at far less damage to shareholders.
Agreed 100% KCCO, it’s either too cost prohibitive, too theoretical and/or years away from anything. And nothing they should be wasting a moment’s thought on. Focus on revenues now, period.
POET announced the current offering on Monday, December 11, it opened the day at $1.05 but closed at the announced offering price of 90 cents.
Knowing that a $1+ threshold is required to maintain a NASDAQ listing, why did the company choose 90 cents USD as its offering price, including a warrant? The average closing share price was $1.018 cents the prior week, with most of the week spent hovering in the $1.05 range.
They could have placed the offering at $1.01, with a warrant thrown in, to try to maintain the $1 minimum SP, why choose a price well below the $1 mark that virtually guaranteed the share price would be sub $1 for the entire time of the offering? Who approves these decisions?
Agreed protocol, I think the 10/30 million scenario was presented in an earlier Zacks report, or just using BFYY 3 year numbers, I don’t recall, but based on most recent information, the lower numbers now seem to be the expectations. Why POET themselves refuse to clarify this is a bigger question. Either they agree with these projections, or have little confidence in their own ability to provide forecasts.
I may be wrong, but it feels like their earliest agreements with prospective customers have painted them into a corner. Maybe a more aggressive exec team could have presented this product development for customers as “No NRE, no deal”, but it’s pretty clear, based on the paucity of NRE, POET has assumed the cost of development of almost all products, including “tweaks” that are being requested by customers, which result in longer development time and greater expense.
POET execs have suggested many times that they may have been better off as a private company. That’s BS. Looking at companies like AYAR, CAI etc, Rockley, it’s an easy argument to make, but given the failure of the GaAs technology, I question that private investors would have had the patience to give them the second chance that existing shareholders gave them.
AWBV, it’s my impression that they will get revenues for 100/200/400G via sales of the optical engines to SPX. Granted those sales will essentially be at cost, but it should show up as revenue.
I’ve been a proponent of them selling the rights up to 400G, but retain everything that results in a product >400G. My rational was that it could generate capital to accelerate development at 800G+ as well as light sources and other applications such as wearables. There is enough business in that legacy market to make it a possibility. And they could license any development that evolves at >400G.
I’m in the “believe it when I see it” camp, but maybe this provides some clarification.
https://agoracom.com/ir/POETTechnologies/forums/discussion/topics/797646-poet-products/messages/2403123#message
The only thing scarier than the possibility that they don’t have a clue how to promote their financing is the possibility that they know exactly what they are doing. Publishing non news as news (with no $$ attached), how did they expect the share price action to react?
A short poll.
Please answer the following question with a simple “better”, “worse” or “no different”.
How would you view your current or future investment in POET if management announced that it planned changes in the structure of its executive team and Board of Directors?
If you respond here, please do not reply to this question if it appears on other forums. Results will be compiled no later than January 3rd.
Thanks, enjoy the holidays.
Keep us posted, thanks.
Great, tell your friend to tell his friend to make it go viral.
Always looked at CAI relationship as POET being an external light source, not concerned about the rest of the hardware. I mean, we don’t question why POET isn’t inside the products to which the transceivers will connect. Maybe there is an opportunity beyond the light source, maybe not. May be many other potential applications to expand into.
What I do agree 100% on is time erosion of technological advantage. That’s irrefutable, and moving from early 2020s to mid 2020s is not a good thing.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Don’t know if this clouds or clarifies the discussion:
Starlight is the light source (finished module) that powers the first generation of Celestial’s AI’s Photonic Fabric. Expect that Celestial AI will deliver a finished product that already incorporates Starlight as a component.
Link to source of previous message.
https://agoracom.com/ir/POETTechnologies/forums/discussion/topics/796280-starlight-is-external-to-an-asic/messages/2399463#message
Enjoy the rest of the day.
JJ,
It might be funny if it wasn’t possibly the truth.
And I’d venture that a sizable number of those doing the chastising were busy trading themselves.
I’d love to remove my pinned post, it’s now badly outdated and potentially misleading. I’ve tried, if any mods here have the wherewithal, please advise or feel free to take it down.
The irony to me, as so many POET shareholders denigrate LWLG’s progress, I firmly believe if they were in POET’s shoes and needed the cash for production, Lebby could get the cash needed with a snap of his fingers, and the share price would probably multiply in the process. Industry cred.
Nope, given how they have moved the goalposts, I’m already in the “fool me twice” + crowd. Barring drastic organizational changes-communication, personnel and culture I’m out of the fan club.Now it’s hard numbers or nothing, talk is expensive.
No words for this one.
But hey, tomorrow is CFU Mika’s 7th anniversary with the company. The opening share price was $2.30 on November 2, 2016. Tonight, albeit after hours, and 45 minutes or so before the announcement of this offering, the share price was dropped 12.5% to $2.38. One penny of share price appreciation for each year, and one for your thoughts. You don’t want mine.
Much appreciated. At this point this might be a preferable solution given POET being taken to the cleaners in the past.
Thanks KCCO,
Question for you. I recall LWLG using Lincoln Park(?) for years under an agreement where they funded them in exchange for shares at market. Is that correct? Other than the requisite dilution, what were the negatives? It certainly paid off for LP when LWLG blew the top off, a lot of those shares were bought sub $1 I believe.
The CEO must speak now. Shareholders have felt uninformed for months as the share price has fallen steadily, and he has done nothing to alleviate the uncertainty. This is not responsible leadership.
Candor matters. What is progressing as planned, what is taking longer and why? Time erodes advantage, silence breeds doubt.
Time to address communication challenges as readily as technological ones.
AWBW said “How can a start up like Celestial AI raise so much money based on a concept that has no customers right now yet not take considerable positions in Poet a co design partner on the external light source?”
Great question, let me paraphrase for another question, “How can a start up like Celestial AI raise so much money based on a concept that has no customers right now, while POET, with a proven technology, scrapes and scrounges for investment pennies with no ability to attract interest whatsoever from the broader Nasdaq market?”
In answer to your question, Lazovsky and company have done a fantastic job of conveying the value of their technology to the biggest and best investor groups. POET’s CEO shuns investor engagement in favor of invention, leaving those responsibilities to a CFO who doesn’t seem to possess the ability to convey the value that POET represents, or is outright disregarded by the investor community.
Great news for new investors as they can get into a commercializing technology at at pre-development prices, but a ****show for long term investors who have not seen anything approaching a decent return in the past 8+ years, and now see potential for a long spell of capital raising at depressed share prices, further diluting and delaying their return on investment.
Just a guess, but I’d bet a buck that the $30 million ATM deal with Craig Hallum was finalized the week of June 12, with the closing roughly 2 weeks later. So we rose to a high of $5.45 on June 13th, at $4.77 on June 29, the day the ATM was announced, falling from that day to where we now sit around $3.10, a neat 43% haircut for the finance partner to capitalize on and another rally cut off at the knees for shareholders, and no one wants to touch POET with a 10 foot pole, except maybe some ATM buyers. Brilliant job to all who approved and executed this decision.
Question for the company:
What do we, as shareholders, have to look forward to?
Questions for shareholders:
Prior to the next AGM,
1. What share price would it take for you to be satisfied with the company’s progress?
2. What share price would it take for you to give the company (the entire BoD, CEO, CFO) a vote of no confidence?
As investors, we have gone through years of anticipating, largely based on the information we are provided by the company, that next year is going to be “our year”. But we are still here and we continue to believe they will succeed.
The questions are asked to force us to give thought to attaching some accountability to our expectations, not just for the company, but for ourselves as responsible shareholders. There are no right or wrong answers, but the only answers I am interested in are numbers. No, “if this” or “but that”. No judgment.
For me it’s 1. $10 USD and 2. $6 USD.
We can revisit this after the next AGM is announced.
I would ask the company directly, but I doubt they would answer me.
Texbanker, your concern regarding the language is noted, “demand” has been changed to “request”. Thanks for your feedback.
Seeker, the letter will be sent to the company with the list of signatories. It represents all of those signatories and not a single group. Anyone shareholder who wants to sign on may do so.
The intent is to obtain a valid explanation for opening an offering only to have to suspend it a mere 5 weeks later, and to eliminate speculation for this occurring. The prospect of re-upping another offering under similar conditions, given the share price reaction to the initial ATM, is not promising unless substantial events change the investment environment.
As for the suggestion to step away seeker, certain actions by the company deserve scrutiny rather than cheerleaders.