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.
Please post the exact time the ASM begins and how it may be found on the internet. Thanks.
I'm legally blind and I need to surf through the classic to read a few entries by ccertain people and if I can't use classic all the time, I will have to rely on Reddit and other sources. I need to be able to permanently use classic.
Proto, thank you for the detail work you provide in explaining the Growth Funnel. It is very thought provoking.
I seem to remember a list of catalysts previously proposed in a MarcoPolo post. Maybe some or all ofthem could be crammed into the overflowing Funnell.
For this LWLG long this funnel packed so tight leading down to a very narrow funnel outlet is a troublesome picture for the longer term future of Lightwave.
Maybe I’m an unduly nervous longtime stockholder.
That damned funnel picture creates my worries. I don’t have any background that would help me answer any of the following questions. I have put a great deal of faith in Lebby as an industry leader, but now it seems that the future demands will force him to select people and a company structure that will enable the company to very rapidly scale into a much larger enterprise. OR BE BOUGHT OUR BY A MUCH LARGER ENTERPRISE.
If we move into 2024 with the same narrow funnel outlet leading only to Dr. Lebby and just him and some guy named Aitkem (I think) the only two LWLG employees pushing commercialization??? How many doctoral engineers, chemists, etc. are good at closing sales.? How many sales people do we need to handle any of these accounts crammed into the funnel? Don’t we need account managers/closers for these Tier1 accounts or possible verticals such as Lidar, the military, medical research, etc.? What about financial people and lawyers used to negotiating and closing complex contracts? What about a CFO? What about Marcelli?
How many Lebby clones can we hire? Some of you have experience that must be better informed than mine about this stage in small company development. Please share whatever you can. I can’t be the only person thinking about the longer term challenges.
I guess another way of saying this is…Yes UBIQUITY may be the future for polymers, our processes, our patents, but will it be in Lightwaves name?
I thought the goal was 50 employees by the end of 2023??
Thanks Pro. Now the post-it makes sense.
I need help. I'm 87 years old and many skills slide downhill at this age including memory. I have a post-it that says "Aitkem - VP" amd I cannot remember what it means??? Does this have any meaning for any of you?? Thanks in advance.
Marco, thanks for responding. I agree with your statement…”There is alot we do not know.” So many on this board want to focus on all the negative possibilities whereas I enjoy imagining as many looming positive scenarios I can generate starting with some of the things we “do Know.”
Lab expansion seems front and center right now. KCCO in his “What’s next?” dealt with many of the immediate ongoing technical challenges. These are important immediate time consumers. Not being technical, I prefer to leave them in the hands of whoever is running the lab and Dr. Zyskind (and hopefully his newly trained assistants “extenders” that you propose.)
I’m a long term investor and would like to imagine the company as it is evolving between the 2024ASM and the 2025 ASM.
Thinking positively, if we begin by assuming that some or many of the commercial goals mentioned in Lewrock’s recent post 146535 are realized, then the possible positive scenarios ending at 2025 ASM become legion.
Imagining relentless successful penetration of the data center and telecommunication markets leaves us with Lebby and the word “Ubiquity.” Your post on catalysts listed a wide variety of markets and opportunities. If we have not figured out a way to clone Lebby by then, how do we best structure the personnel to achieve a positive start toward Ubiquity?
Maybe we sell off the data center business and use the shelf to organize a business to deal with all the other markets??? Too many other positive possibilities. It makes my head ache.
You mentioned Zyskind “extenders.” How and what kind of Lebby “extenders” can and should be created? Is Ubiquity a possible goal for one leader?
I had just finished a reply to your message about LWLG catalysts which follows, but then you ended this message with the related comment here…”I hope Lebby has a plan on how to quickly add these new foundries to the manufacturing effort.
I appreciate your contributions to the board, and this list of catalysts was thought provoking.
First, I’m an 87 year old retired educator. I happened luckily to gradually buy 120K+ LWLG shares back in 2018-2019. Little experience with tech or business.
I do follow IHub and have a great deal of time to dream, wonder, and question. I’m wondering given the often used UBIQUITY and all the various opportunities on your list if there aren’t many others wondering how the hiring and evolving company structure over the next couple of years would best serve our efforts to move toward as many of these ubiquitous goals as possible?
I’m assuming that the stated goal of 50 employees by the end of 2024 is accurate(about 20 people added from present count.)
I agree with previous comments that a market facing CFO would be a welcome addition to allow
Marcelli to continue his great job of keeping our financial situation in such good shape.
More importantly, I’m interested in your ideas about the new personnel and company structure that would best serve LWLG in the next two years.
Lebby got us here, but now that we want commercial and revenue successes, I’m wondering if he doesn’t need more help making commercial contacts than just one man, Atikem Halimariam. And that’s just one aspect of structural challenge for the near future.
I could dream up my list of hires and a company structure to strive toward in the next couple of years, but it would just be dreaming from a very old retired educator.
I’d like to ask you or any of the board who has some structural business ideas to add some suggestions to this real company challenge. What steps would best impact and magnify both Lebby’s efforts and shareholder wealth.?
Won't there have to be a signed revenue contract between Polariton and LWLG if this is a commercial product for sale?
While we’re waiting I’m wondering about thoughts concerning longer range challenges. It has been stated that our goal is to have 50 employees by the end of 2024.We are supposed to be heading into high volume production by then. What help does Lebby need to best meet these needs?
I believe Marcelli has done a wonderful job getting us to this stage, but he doesn’t seem to show any desire to be an onstage presenter of official financial data. Maybe I’m wrong about his motivation, but anyway hopefully in the next 6 quarters there will be some number of financial accounts signed and if by that time analysts have been assigned specifically to LWLG, they will expect a CFO or “someone” to make comments about quarterly financial earnings and to make financial estimates of future quarterly and annual earningl.
And then long range, there’s this often chanted UBIQUITY. How are these new 25 or so employees going to be structured to best move us toward UBIQUITY? There are mentions of opportunities with quantum/super computers, LIDAR, bio medicine, military/DARPA, , and on and on. I hope Lebby is right in the middle of many of these, but what type of employee is most needed to start the movement forward in these areas? Scientists, technical, marketing, accounting??? Maybe someone should ask Bard about the most efficient human resource structure for a startup lik LWLG??
I almost forgot the possible need for buyout negotiation or the possible subsidiary construction using the shelf?
Excitement has been building and hopefully these 25 new people will magnify Lebby’s impact to help us meet our goals.
I have been absent from the board for a few months because of medical problems, but I’m still able to generate questions….
It seems the accepted wisdom on the board is that LWLG revenue will become relevant to our share price sometime in 2024.
Assuming LWLG has reached all the 2022 ASM goals including the licensing agreement and the tech transfer agreement, is it possible for Lebby to convince Wall Street that this has been achieved without starting some sort of a short squeeze? You have mentioned the $20-30 price range.
Do you believe it is possible he could word his report in a way that would be acceptable, but not significantly impactful on share pricing?
If so, do you believe it is likely that he might try to mute this pre-2023 ASM report to delay the possible short squeeze impact until there was even stronger milestones or targets that will be reached next year?
Please check my math..
If $4Billion is a profit, then that growth should command at least a 30 P/E ratio.
That would mean $120B divided by share count of 130M which leaves us a share price of $927.
I too hold Dec Call options OTM.
I am a Lebby man in for the long haul and will not sell anmore than I have to for my RMD (I am 87 years old).
Lebby approach has been shareholder friendly, but worry now is that it is not going to be options friendly. I guess he cannot monitor everything.
I am not experienced with options and took a flyer because of faith in our “conservative” leader. I have no idea what to expect even if we get a good PR before Wednesday. If you or others with Dec options have a strategy surrounding good news, I’d appreciate some wisdom from anyone experienced with options esp. In their last 5 days before expiration.
GLTA.
Not sure what you mean about "2 different announcements??"
My Iowa team overcame many weaknesses at times this year, but losing 2 key players in the first quarter was too much to overcome.
I’m rooting for the dates you mentioned and I have some OTM December Calls.
Hoping Lebby is “conservative” enough not to wait until the last minute to make the announcement.
Do I remember you are from Nebraska? They are surprising Iowa at halftime.
I was wondering the same thing. Also, where was the idea mentioned that there would be a “Trading temporarily halted” announcement appearing on the Nasdaq exchange on the big day.
Your advice avoids the basic question as to the identity and prevalence of “the shorts.” So far the only educated guesses about this is that the percentage of retail shorts is very small compared to the “professional, hard core, AI shorts.”
With 80% of market money controlled each day by algorithmic institutions, and the evidence of LWLG being manipulated throughout the last year, it would be hard to argue that the retail shorts carry more weight than the ”professionals.”
So the idea that we need to let the AI supported professionals do “their own homework” is at best NAIVE and more likely DANGEROUS.
You seem to be approaching this as if it’s one retail short vs. one retail long. Believe me that’s what the algorithmic driven Wall Street would like to maintain as the predominant myth while they maintain and strengthen their manipulation.
I agree with your educated guess. You and I and any sensible person has no interest in the fate of this small percentage of shorts.
Let’s consider the larger percentage that have been labeled “professional, hard core, AI shorts.”
These manipulaators seem very patient as if they’ve done this before. I have no experience here. I’m guessing that being professional they have a possible end strategy that may include many steps beyond the initial stage of the short squeeze.
What further PPS manipulations may be on their agendas once the initial shock stabilizes? Is there research of info that might shed light for most of us who I’m assuming are newbies to this situation?
This is today’s market. About 80% of the money moved each day is through algos with many agencies very practiced in certain strategies carefully planned and researched. We get manipulated, especially if we don’t even try to understand some of these processes. I don’t like feeling manipulated.
Do you have any estimate of what percentage of the shorts are the "professional, hard core, AI shorts"?
TIA
Thanks so much for your help. My report has been entered correctly with your help.
Thank you so much for posting access to that article. Lightwave’s future depends more on how this new U.S. - China semiconductor conflict evolves than any other single factor that can be discussed on IHub. The immediate war threat is very sobering, but even if that does not materialize, the repercussions are predicted to last decades. Thanks again.
Again I must thank you for your response and all the depth and clarity you add to this board with your posting.
I understand and agree with each of your main points. I too believe that the U.S. took this major step last week to implement a long term security strategy for our chip industry and our countries future.
I’m sure there will be an ongoing series of actions and responses after this serious opening salvo. One source indicated it would take China at least a decade to build the infrastructure needed to compete in this special chip area. I do not intend to continue any China comments now as the situation is just beginning and seems very fluid.
The IHub board obsession with the “short squeeze” is understandable but
oh so repetitive. If and when the hoped for impact occurs it will most likely be a very short time even. This dance we have begun with China will have many twists and turns over the next decade and will be so very important to Lightwve’s future.
Please keep monitoring and sharing your expertise with the board. TIA
Thank you for the time you spent in being so thorough and exact with your answer to my question.
And yes, I see the dichotomy that was developed by the board’s focus on words by Marcelli, Proto, and others.
At the risk of causing more confusion, I’m going to add a new dimension that has not been discussed recently. This is off the beaten path as I have a memory of the period when Lebby came as a consultant and about a year later he was made CEO. I believe as we were trying to learn as much as we could about Lebby and his management style, one of the popular descriptions that arose (probably from the European side) was that “He under promises and over delivers”
Fair or not, he has a list of surprising “over deliveries” bumping around in my brain. The smooth entry into NASDAQ, the speed record surprises, the shelf as a massive positive overhang for our future, and more.
You and KCCO are right in your exact interpretations of his language, but a good part of me is strongly leaning away from seeing Lebby focusing on the minimal “under promise” and as in the past coming up with a surprising “over deliver.”
All of this could be unfair, but competitive people usually strive to maintain their reputation. Last May was a little bump in the road. Let’s see if it was a prelude to this year’s big surprise. And yes I feel the most likely candidate for the new surprise is revenue in some form.
Whatever happens by the end of 2022 will have absolutely no affect on my long term hold on my LWLG shares.
Please feel no obligation to respond as this is just speculation of one poster. It is somewhat humorous as to the variety of thoughts engendered from all these “expected results” posts.
Your concern about the expansion of the U.S. - China Cold War is very worrying and has Lightwave problems and opportunities that should be being discussed on this board.
Basically the U.S. advanced semi conductor restrictions just announced this week are a very direct frontal attack on the exact weakest point of China’s industrial infrastructure.
The impact of choking off Chinese access to these advanced chips can hardly be imagined in so many key areas of the world’s future. Data is the new oil and chips are needed to handle data. For the last decade China has spent more money each year importing chips than it has spent importing oil.
This last fact comes from a new book titled CHIP WARS written by Chris Miller. To learn more he has a number of recent short interviews on You Tube.
I can think of no topic more pertinent to Lightwave’s future than this area. I’ll start with both a concern and an opportunity area. Concern is that this now becomes so disruptive to chip companies worldwide, that it delays decision making, especially by 5 unnamed foundries. Obvious opportunity should be the DARPA area that tkg has been discussing today.
You write…
-Less than three months for published foundry results.
-One commercial deal with a partner within seven months.
-One commercial deal with a foundry within seven months.
You have always been very careful and exact with your words. I believe some semantic clarification is needed. I have believed that this 2022 guidance included mention of a commercial deal involving 2 foundries. Followed by more commercial agreements with 3 more foundries before June 30, 2023. I believe the general assumption is that a commercial deal would involve some sort of revenue transfer or projection.
I am 87 and legally blind so it is difficult for me to do this research to clarify the evident discrepancies. I thought I knew what “on track” meant, but if LWLG is saying they can meet the 2022 guidance without signing a commercial DEAL that mentions revenue, I have not understood the main message that I believe many on this board also believe.
Does SOON mean a DEAL announcement coming in October?
If not, one concern that I have not seen mentioned on the board is the November election date. Ray Dalio, the CEO of the largest hedge fund retired yesterday. About a month ago he predicted a 40% chance there would be civil unrest after the election in an interview with Charlie Rose…reference You Tube. Other predictions indicate turmoil from many different actions including huge numbers of elections at all levels not accepted by losers and thrown into an overburdened judicial system no one trusts.
There isn’t much stability in the world or the markets right now, but I’m thinking there could easily be quite a bit less if Dalio’s prediction is even partly true.
I’m for SOON being October. It’s a sobering thought, but LWLG needs to get its future tied to the foundries and Tier 1 companies as soon as possible. I’m more confident that the world’s citizenr will want to maintain the web and their phone contacts than they will be to maintain a free government without violence and strife.
I read that algorithms control 70-80% of each days market volume.
Reading this board seems to indicate that Mr. Freddy retail long is competing with Mr. Sammy short for all the shares.
Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems Mr. Also has the upper hand with this pre revenue company and can manipulate LWLG with ease based only on the past share price history. Mr. Freddy should be hoping for numbers like up front payments, revenue in any form, estimated revenue that will grow from month to month that will make Mr. Algo’s job much more difficult.
I’m afraid there is danger in behaving as if this is a person vs. person buyer/seller market. The history of human decision making vs. AI machine decision making is not good.
Thanks to you and Lewrock for your shelf research. Timeline was a little further out than I thought.
Guess I'll have to go back to the "October to remember" theme.
Yesterday I posted questions about the shelf. My post was totally ignored. I’ll try again. Since we have options extending to 2025, I would think the prospect of the timing of the shelf might be a pertinent topic to discuss.
Maybe I’m wrong and if so I’d like any contradictory evidence, but I believe when the shelf was first mentioned they talked about a 3 year time limit.
I’d also like verification about any deadline whether it is 3 years or whatever??
Thanks in advance for any responses.
Without a doubt, the use of polymers to reduce a huge amount of energy should make us one of the most ESG compliant corporations in the world.
Two questions:
Am I right in remembering that when the shelf was first mentioned they talked about a 3 year time limit?
If that is right, when is the 3 year deadline and what needs to be accomplished before that date?
I guess that might be 3 questions???
Jeunke your shareholder number breakdown is intriguing.
Lots of if, if then, if thens come to mind.
Here’s a possible scenario:
The commercial DEAL announced in September. Conservative response is $28 share price for LWLG.
Around November 15 LWLG hosts first conference call with analyst questions about revenue expectations and Lebby has answers which jump the stock price to $40+
At that price we have now moved from $7 to $40 in a short period of time and we are now classified as a midcap stock with many, many more financial institutions likely to want some piece of the action.
If the Tier 1 group are not coming up with buy out bids, what is our response? Do we issue a 2 for 1…or a 3 for 1 stock split to meet this midcap demand? What other option is there?
What other positive or negative scenarios are more likely?
To your point, if the short squeeze pushes LWLG stock price to $40 as some have speculaed, LWLG would now be a MIDCAP and be an eligible investment to zillions of institutions around the worrld. Think any of them would be interested in a stock who recently moved from $7 a share to $40?
When the first Senate vote passed 64-32 this morning, Yahoo had a long article about how this was now a $79B package and not just a $52B bill as originally proposed. The article ended by mentioning some minimal opposition in the house, but concluded that the odds were good that it would all be finalized by Friday and sent to the President’s desk.
It would seem from the areas mentioned where the extra $27B were added that LWLG would have some targets to shoot for.
Maybe LWLG should be looking to hire some writers experienced in writing grants and proposals??
I’m wondering if anyone else is wondering about the whereabouts of Admiral Z yesterday? Does he live in Washington D.C. area? If Lebby was summoned to testify at some legislative hearing, would the Admiral have been available to add some perspective and support?
“UNDER PROMISE, OVER DELIVER” I’m almost certain this phrase came from one of the European posters regarding Lebby’s management style during his leadership of the European consortium. Probably offered as support during Lebby’s transition into Lightwave leadership. Maybe one of the posters can verify that?
Anyway, the mantra has been offered numerous times on the board in the last few years. As we approach the ASM, it would seem to be a logical, relevant topic regarding specific requirements to meet this guideline given all the predictions and prognostications that have been offered here.
What is the minimum DEAL or revenue announcement needed to keep your belief that this management history is still intact?
X...That really doesn't seem to meet the glorified "Under promise, over deliver" tribute that Lebby is supposed to honor.
Does anyone believe Pitcock will get his DEAL announcement by Friday?
I like the numbers in the theroc66 message. They deal very specifically with energy savings. Can some of you numbers people combine or supplement those numbers with numbers about getting 3x the efficiency or photonic flow?
Please excuse my proofreading errors in my last message posted last night. My excuse is that I’m 86 years old and legally blind having lost most of my sight about 3 years ago. I’m using special equipment provided by the VA, but it doesn’t contain a button to correct carelessness.
I would still be interested in any comments regarding a possible conflict between a quarterly conference call and the ASM in May.