Anyone remember what the SGLB market cap was back when it reached the highs during OTC days? The shares were trading at something like $.28, but I would like to know what the market cap was.
Thanks

All the best,
Silversmith

I can easily picture a November Formnext announcement that Trumpf has licensed PR3D technology. This allows them to say they have designed a system of melt pool monitoring for their machines. Or they can just claim that it is SGLB inside, however they wish. One thing for sure, they haven't created anything on their own that is an equal to PR3D. They didn't choose to go that route in the very beginning. Right from the beginning they stated they chose to go with the leading expert in that category, SGLB. I doubt that has changed.

Tick Toc. Time is running out to get shares at a very good value. We have an all time, most firm yet, body of information pointing to a truly value-added, return-on-investment product that the industry can use. Apparently Schwartz has seen and heard enough. He is buying big time. Whether sizable future revenue streams, or a buy out of SGLB, the money is to be made now, at these share prices.

All the best,
Silversmith

But that's the whole point Outlook. You aren't making money by expanding the authorized.
If you had invested $10K just after the NASDAQ uplist with the company authorized at 7.5 million shares and $6.00 per share, you would have 1,667 shares.
If SGLB then went on to a $150 million market cap at $20.00 per share, you would be worth $33,340.

Now, at the proposed 22.5 million authorized, the same market cap of $150 million is a share price of $6.67. And you would be worth $11,118.

You let them expand the authorized, but you didn't reap the reward.

All the best,
Silversmith

Why shouldn't investors vote no increase in the authorized? What are your items in the list of reasons why an expansion of authorized should be approved?
At this moment, with resources to get the company through April next year, enough shares to cover conversions and warrants, a little over two million shares available yet for use as the administration sees fit, and sales in sight, I have not a single item in my list as reasons for approving an expansion in the authorized.

All the best,
Silversmith

The long term shareholders of SGLB are step by step being squeezed out of any future enrichment value from SGLB. Only the officers of the company and those with access to convertible instruments will accrue the lion's share of future SGLB value.

The company is depleted of shares to employ in its ongoing operations because it has been earmarking them for a narrow crowd. Without exception, the entire administration of SGLB has generated net negative equity in the company by not sharing the burden of the cost of operations. They have done so on the backs of shareholders' continuously shrinking piece of the pie.

Are shareholders the only entities to shoulder the cost of waiting for a return? Should not the administration and the company as a whole also bear some of the weight, waiting too for the earned resources to organically expand its footprint and force in the marketplace without further depleting it investors?

Upon moving to the NASDAQ, the authorized share count was seven and a half million. The reverse splits were structured such that investor's percent ownership remained constant. This has not been the case for the last, and currently proposed expansion. Long term shareholders are being squeezed into nearly 400 percent less ownership in SGLB.

No company led by a first rate intellect, with or without current revenue streams, will elect to be acquired by a company with no appreciable resources which can be brought to bear to help the acquired company grow. Therefore, any company which SGLB might acquire will either be desperate, or will have no current or near term sales revenue. No immediate strength will accrue to SGLB or its shareholders. Would SGLB perform an acquisition that would benefit and enrich a friend or colleague, such as OXY, while SGLB's administration does not simultaneously become enriched?
Expanding the authorized share count for acquisitions seems a stretch. The only acquiring that makes sense is that of SGLB being acquired themselves.

The metal print industry is very seriously, perhaps mortally, in need of a first rate IPQA solution. The industry completely requires a solution provider that sits at the summit in its competence, intelligence, commitment and business skill. Is this John Rice? Is he qualified? Should he be both a Director and CEO?

It is time for SGLB's administration to stop pushing the entire burden off onto its shareholders. It is time for SGLB to reward its shareholders in the many ways that it can now, and in the future.

All the best,
Silversmith

Ob, this doesn't warrant a PR. This is a scientific paper presenting data. This is something engineers will use. And I bet this isn't news to the engineers working with PR3D either. I bet many could see that PR3D can do this stuff. The gift to you is in the knowing about it before the rest of the world. Rest easy and buy your shares before everyone else one day moves into this thing.

All the best,
Silversmith

Been traveling all day kanya. Just now checking in here.
Yes I do believe this will be the IPQA tech to get the metal print industry moving. It is clear beyond any doubt that the TED metric is ideal for closed loop. I have no doubt that SGLB will use TED for their closed loop module. Continued work by Cola and gang will make PR3D more and more user friendly, plug-and-play, and exist at the board level. Heck, just from the data matrix in Jackel's document, even I could calculate percent elongation myself for any beam strengths. I suspect that Cola has mostly always known that PR3D could do this. They have the data to show the world's engineers that IPQA gives real-time physical characteristic knowledge. The engineers will know that closed loop is just around the corner from this. Investors can rest easy. PR3D works in a very profound way.

All the best,
Silversmith

That is pretty much a slam dunk Jackle. It is very clear that TED is powerful. For everyone thinking that PR3D doesn't work, that printed metal physical properties can't be determined using PR3D, well the data says it just ain't so.
On page 22, table 3, TED values are very clearly and accurately following elongation values. TED value is locked in with percent elongation. So much so, it looks like you can give a precise and accurate actual percent elongation value of the printed metal part directly from the TED value.
On page 23, figure 16, again, TED is locked in with tensile strength. This is clearly capable of indicating acceptable tensile strength immediately off the build plate.
But what is amazing to me is that on page 25, figure 18, TED values are again locked in with the printed metal part's resultant density measurements. This is pretty amazing stuff. TED is powerful. Holy mackerel.

SGLB is going to be the IPQA provider of the metal 3D print industry.

All the best,
Silversmith

Thanks for the $1.02's. Just took 10K of them.

All the best,
Silversmith

I think you may be right kanya.
Rice was just over there two weeks ago. It begs the question, would he have let it become public knowledge that he was there if the trip was one in which he was hat in hand begging for business, or trying to find out why something fell through. I don't think so. He wanted us to know. I too think something is coming from your land of engineering.
I'm buying, have been, now rather than later, because I know I can get them at $1.04. Once the $1.04's are gone, who knows what you will pay for them.

All the best,
Silversmith

It seems to me that the focus of SGLB's efforts have been within a tight circle of potential customers, maybe four or so. So it seems reasonable to conclude the first real production sales will be among Cat, Siemens, Aerojet and/or Trumph. Those are very big names. Are they big enough for Wall Street to take notice? I would say so. It would put SGLB on the map for sure. Investors and shareholders of those companies are going to hear SGLB's name in their own investor conference calls. The number of eyes on us will grow rapidly. I would say market cap would tickle, or clear, $100 million rapidly. Then Wall Street analysis will take place, and growth based market cap numbers will begin to be thrown around. I see lots of green coming our way.

All the best,
Silversmith

I don't know about that. Because of the patent issued, and the others in the pipeline, if the metal print industry plans on using sensor based monitoring that includes the melt pool, and how can it not include the melt pool, then they have to go through SGLB. It is the law of the land. And what I heard on the call that I didn't know before, is that if another company licenses SGLB's tech, then they too can go after any other AM company for damages if they aren't going through SGLB. That is big time, and a big stick.

I am almost very confident that SGLB is on the verge of being worth quite a nice dollar amount. I don't see how SGLB won't be acquired at some point. Still, it will unfold at its own, so far, slow pace.

All the best,
Silversmith

I've been seeing this for a long time now Z. I think it is just the behavior of the limit order. All it would have taken to lower the ask is a single limit order for one share at the lower ask price. I think most all SGLB trades by those people not really taking a position are going on the books as limit orders. If we were doing most trading at the market, the behavior would be very different.

All the best,
Silversmith

Shares are now over a buck in after hours trading.

All the best,
Silversmith

Most promising call yet, in my opinion, for many reasons. And I agree with the SGLB officers. This company is way undervalued in market cap. As I very much prematurely said a couple of years ago, now we are going to start to see who around here has what it takes; who will be winners and who will be losers. Its going to swing around and start to be fun watching this board again.
I have the advantage of having been through a heaping handful of new concept technology launches and startups. It is way, way hard to do. I was involved in one that actually bankrupted two end-user customers during the evolution/rollout. Tuff times indeed. But SGLB is telling us between the lines that things are looking very much better than before. Between the lines, they are saying that PR3D is now powerful, and success is coming.

All the best,
Silversmith

Thanks TedJ. My apology for any confusion in the question.
I was simply wondering if both accredited investors had converted the preferred. I couldn't find anything conclusive about it at the moment.
So, assuming only Schwartz converted, we now have one accredited investor content with getting 10% on the preferred while they wait. And another who, undoubtedly along with advice from their advisors, decided to forgo the 10% in hand and convert. And also apparently decided to forgo unloading the common at something greater than 10%, even though they were at risk of, and are now, probably at or under the waterline.
While being an accredited investor doesn't also mean one is very savvy, I wonder what their information and inference of SGLB's prospects are. Both investors appear to have chosen to hold shares in SGLB when in fact they both had the means to recoup their investment principle, and make immediate, respectful, gains.

All the best,
Silversmith

Question for you TedJ, or anyone else who can shed light.
At the end of Q2, in the K report, it was reported that 500 of the 1000 preferred shares had been converted to common. At the time the share price was above a buck by about a quarter or so. Then selling took over in general. I assumed it was the preferred investors. They were getting 10% on the preferred. But they could get more than 10% if they converted and sold. I figured that was what was going on.
Now we have the Schwartz 13G. So I am wondering if anyone has dug out whether this is the second of the preferred investors? Or did the first actually decide to keep the common rather than sell for 20-25% gains? Or did I miss something since then?

All the best,
Silversmith

This is not even close to the same sandbox wick. Blockchain would track the part or assembly from raw material to an end-use application, but it doesn't do anything concerning interfacing with a manufacturing process for any type of evaluation or judgment of the process. It is more like blockchain is the view and record from thirty thousand feet, while IPQA is the view and record from within the molecules and atoms of material.

All the best,
Silversmith

There is plenty to dislike about how the fortunes of SGLB have proceeded. But oddly, there is one thing about SGLB that I am thankful for; and that is the company carries no debt. Or nearly no debt. There is a reckoning coming to corporations in the fairly near future. Global corporate debt is around $55 trillion, with nearly all of it at very low interest. In 2019 a little over $4 trillion of it comes due in full. And rolling it over will be at higher and higher interest rates. Many, and likely very many, companies that are struggling, and have debt, will fold. I fully expect there will be about a third of the current pure-play or near pure-play 3D Print companies who will run head-on into a debt concrete wall. This storm of economic malaise will be well over the heads of little ole SGLB though. They should be able to weather the coming storm. If they can win a few contracts at stable and progressive manufacturer companies, they should be in fine shape to move forward in spite of the carnage all around them.

All the best,
Silversmith

Windbag, I was looking at the individual share prices going back to Jan 2011. Everything in between then and now is the bubble build, pop, and decline. The ETF didn't exist back that far. Neither did MTLS for that matter. Compare 2011-2012 with today's prices. You will see it.

All the best,
Silversmith

Thought I'd just take a look at SGLB today. I see it's just like all the rest of the 3D Print industry still.
No one is moving anywhere in the industry. It is amazing that the whole investing world moved in at least five years too early. SGLB was previously lower still, by a little bit, than it is now. In February 2012 it was a little lower yet. Anywhere around the current share price, or a little lower, will have wrung out the full industry bubble movement into SGLB. But it is no different than all the other 3D Print stocks. SSYS, MTLS, DDD, XONE etc. They are all fully or mostly in a place whereby no gain of any kind has occurred since the lows of early 2012, before the bubble. The whole industry is snagged up. Full production is still not happening. Even modest production is not happening.
It took two full years for SGLB to top out at the $56ish share price, and four and a half years to come back down to its low.
SGLB is only just now arrived where all the other 3D print players arrived at about a year ago.
Now we are all together in the industry, and probably all share much the same fate. Either the minds steering the industry's efforts make it happen, or they all go away.
Still waiting, and still haven't sold a single share of SGLB, ever.

All the best,
Silversmith

Haven't been watching SGLB for some time now, but this thing cracks me up. It's like wack-a-mole. Smack down one issue, and another pops up. This offering is their answer to the NASDAQ listing hurdle for investor capital. They think the offering takes care of that, and up pops the one buck per share minimum hurdle. Too funny. Are these guys idiots? Probably not so much. They just don't have many options that fit their skill sets.
It's all about the PR3D product now. Sell it and you win. Don't sell it and you lose.
I'm going away again.

All the best,
Silversmith

Miss Nannette is going to start earning her money. SGLB finances are going to be getting complicated.

I noticed that the 1000 share series B preferred is now 500 shares. Half of the preferred were converted into common apparently.

SGLB will sell something to raise cash to clear the NASDAQ hurdle for listing. They already stated a while back that they had funds for operations for the foreseeable future. This is a two part operation. They will clear the listing requirements, and raise cash for flexibility in the future. Good thing investors voted to limit all this to 15 million shares authorized.

All the best,
Silversmith

Nice. Thanks.

jeffx,
One of your recent posts showed the status of the patent about to be issued. The status form talked about a date adjustment of a couple of hundred days or so. Do you know if this is an adjustment of the patent's life end-date to counter the days lost during the patent office review? Is this a typical thing for the patent process?

All the best,
Silversmith

It sure has Alan. It is one of the most confounding things about this whole endeavor for me. It is a real head scratcher. But all in all, I don't see or hear anyone singing the praises of anybody's anything in the metal AM industry. You do see orders for printers, announcements for powder, things like that. But for the most part no one is singing for anyone. I really do not know why, unless its because so much is at stake in the industry. No one wants to be seen making a misstep.

All the best,
Silversmith

Until now all IPQA systems were 'read only'. And nothing like TED existed anywhere. Nothing provided a feedback loop to the printer to actually make the printer change its parameters. It all just didn't exist. PR3D is still doing everything that it has always done. In that respect yesterday is the same as today. But the part you are missing is that everything downstream of PR3D didn't exist yesterday. Today there is now output from TED into a processor, feeding a digital coupler/connector to the printer, making changes to the printer to correct printing deviations on the fly. I'll leave it at that.

All the best,
Silversmith

We are very clear, with every post, that many don't have a clue what the meaning or significance of the PR is all about. Yesterday is not the same as today.
So for your assistance, what just happened is that SGLB hooked up PR3D, started a print run, running the PR3D data stream through TED, analyzed the data real-time on the fly, kicked out printer correction data streams back to the printer, and changed the printer run-parameters in real-time, thereby correcting the actual print run deviations from the digital twin. And it worked just liked SGLB expected it to. Functional closed loop printing, pure and simple.

But most don't get it. SGLB just did what no one has done before.
And all that happened in the share price was nothing more than typical hot money momentum antics. All of the many investor apps would have alerted thousands to the move up, showing momentum, and then hundreds, maybe a thousand or so, day traders and flippers piled in. Then they do what they do. As they are running for their Starbucks they all scalp the stock on their Robinhood apps to make a couple of hundred bucks for the day. And then its off to the next thing. No investing, no thinking, no anything at all but keying into and out of some momentum.

But what will likely happen now is what I am particularly looking forward to.

All the best,
Silversmith

Okay TedJ. Thanks

All the best,
Silversmith

I don't know what part of this you don't get. Straight out of the SEC K report it makes it clear, as below. NOBODY can exercise the warrants offered to the two private investment entities for 180 days. Not the private investor entities themselves, or anyone else on behalf of them. Only the warrants offered to Dawson are unrestricted for being exercised. The original shares registered to the two investment entities are owned by the investment entities. SGLB gets no part of the proceeds from the sale of those shares. Therefore, at this point in time, no proceeds to SGLB are possible coming from the two private investor's actions. Dawson is the only entity from the 1,890,000 offering who could yield proceeds going to SGLB at this time. They could exercise 140,000 shares via the warrants at $1.47 per share. Whether they did or not remains to be seen.

All the best,
Silversmith

Warrants
Under the Purchase Agreement, the Company issued to the Purchasers Warrants to purchase an aggregate of up to 750,000 shares of Common Stock, or 75% of the shares of Common Stock into which the shares of Series B Convertible Preferred sold to the Purchasers are initially convertible. The Warrants have an initial exercise price of $1.47 per share, the closing price of Common Stock reported on The NASDAQ Capital Market on April 6, 2018, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances, may not be exercised until the date that is six months and one day after issuance, and have a term of five years from the initial exercise date. Exercise is also subject to a beneficial ownership limitation of 4.99% (or 9.99% at the option of the Investor).

Placement Agent
Dawson James Securities, Inc. (“Dawson James”) acted as placement agent in the Private Placement pursuant to an engagement letter, dated March 12, 2018 (the “Engagement Letter”), with the Company. In the Engagement Letter, the Company agreed to pay Dawson James a cash fee equal to 8% of the gross proceeds received by the Company from Purchasers on April 6, 2018 and to grant to Dawson James warrants (the “Placement Agent Warrants”) to purchase up to 80,000 shares of Common Stock at an initial exercise price of $1.47 per share, the initial exercise price of the Warrants, and up to 60,000 shares of Common Stock at an initial exercise price of $1.47 per share, the initial exercise price of the Warrants. The Company also agreed to reimburse Dawson James up to $42,500 of expenses (including legal fees and expenses) incurred in connection with the Private Placement.

Yes, we can look at some facts. You both are right.
The two private investor entities are restricted for 180 days, and Dawson is not restricted. But Dawson only had access to 140,000 shares via warrants (80,000 + 60,000 in two separate tranches), not 890,000 shares. But that is maybe just enough to clear the NASDAQ hurdle for listing. Still, there is no evidence that Dawson did enact the warrants. We will learn of it before long if they did though.

All the best,
Silversmith

I just received word from a pretty sharp dude that the interpretation of Rice's discussion with the analyst on the call should probably be interpreted as there being a 15th employee in the pipeline. Not 15 more in the pipeline. That makes more sense to me. I have to go back and review it all.

All the best,
Silversmith

I guess you did.
It was Rice talking to the securities analyst on the last conf call.

All the best,
Silversmith

Hiring personnel in Europe, with 15 more people in the hiring pipeline is not an action that indicates a hail-Mary pass. The very last thing a company does when things are looking grim is hire more people. Hiring people is the single most costly thing a startup company does. Hiring has all kinds of consequences. It is among the hardest decisions to make. I take it to be a tell that contract wins are very near.
This stock is behaving very differently from how it used to. Things have firmed up here. There aren't many sky-is-falling fringe freaks left with shares continuously dribbling into the sell side. This thing is almost acting like a normal stock now. A report of a signed production contract with a publicly known name is going to move this very, very hard in a matter of minutes.
It is going to be fun to watch.

By the way, early on, everyone was pissed that the idea of closed loop was in actuality just a dream for the industry and SGLB. Now SGLB is actively working on it. SGLB's TED technology is the enabling breakthrough for closed loop. Yet nobody here even is paying attention to it. There is not another tech in the whole wide world that is a candidate for closed loop. Yet no one here is even recognizing the significance of what TED can do. No one seems to have picked up on the change in outlook from SGLB. Yesterday and today, printers print parts, the product come out of the build chamber, and inspection sees extensive variability among like printed parts. But now, SGLB'S TED is going to make it such that the parts get printed, but it is the printer's variability that is monitored, and changed, to yield consistent parts in a build production run. That is a big mindset change.

I don't think people here are getting it at all. I think we are good to go, and that this is all going to be much, much bigger than we think its going to be.

All the best,
Silversmith

Wow, that's some volatility. I guess the preferred shares have converted some or all and are coming to market. It will be good to get them integrated sooner rather than later. Then with news of a win, there shouldn't be much to hold things back. I would love to know who or what was acquiring big amounts today. Pretty big buying and selling today for sure. But in reality, once SGLB has revenue, continued rollout of PR3D into the industry, and begins providing forward guidance, we should see multi million share days as the norm.
Can't wait.

All the best,
Silversmith

That will change before long all on its own. Wall Street sniffs out money like a bloodhound. It is what they excel at. Probable IPQA adoption by the industry, SGLB's getting revenue streams going, alongside patents being issued, and Wall Street will be all over this thing. The very cool thing is that we have ringside and very early seats to the show. We are the very earliest public knowledge about what is going on. If this goes ballistic, and if you don't get in this thing before Wall Street does, it is your own fault.

All the best,
Silversmith

Congratulations SGLB. We now have a mote dug around the use of real-time IPQA for quality assurance in the AM industry. Add on, follow-up patents will dig the mote deeper. It is becoming a reality that IPQA technology goes through the gate keeper, SGLB.
Things will get serious now.

All the best,
Silversmith

The patents are going to change everything. Even SGLB's admin is lining up their ducks. I think we will see some options purchases soon. The industry is certainly focused on IPQA now. IPQA is pretty much at the top of the industry list for getting nailed down. It looks like SGLB's presentation of the technology is the best it has ever been, and getting better. Cola and gang have never been such a show of force in the quality of discussion and presentation of the technology as they are now. I am more and more confident that SGLB will be a pretty big winner.

All the best,
Silversmith

Wild bunch of crap going on over at the silicon nitride Sonny farm, eh windbag. Glad I never got into it. I'll take SGLB's financing format any day over that cesspool.

All the best,
Silversmith

I've been taking some nice chunks down here for a few days now. These are gimme's, and I'll take em.

All the best,
Silversmith