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.
June 2017
SLM takes order for 10 machines to China
October 2017
SLM takes order for 70 machines to China
http://www.3ders.org/articles/20171018-slm-solutions-secures-largest-ever-order-as-asian-customer-requests-70-metal-3d-printers.html
China doesn't mess around and is making a big push into AM technology as park of a multi year Govt directed program. Sigma having a sales agent there is good strategy
From the talk John Rice gave to investors at the MicroCap Conference two weeks ago
The niche is the machine OEM's, people who make OEM machines. In the past 6 months we have done deals with Additive Manufacturers [Industries] and Trumpf to be able to sell our equipment as part of their offferings, so people will be able to, by the end of the year, to order a machine with Sigma in it
I have an idea of what different options cost from previous filings. Knowing roughly what options customers have ordered and what they have paid for them. This is inexact as some have contributed data and work to the end product and some haven't. We have also been told a rough idea of cost relative to the overall machine cost, as well as an idea of annual royalties that may be expected.
As we are still in Beta testing in our EAP program i expect this to be the case, and am happy with my understanding of what all this amounts to, and what it could amount to following bigger orders as the market and product align. I do not want to see a catalog price for PrintRite3D and its options, and i understand a) customer needs will be different, and b) i am happy to retain a degree of flexibility in price where circumstances allow.
If you have missed the above then i suggest you go back through past filings and transcripts. If you don't care and have a bigger point to make, then just make it without all the churlish theatrics, i'm sure somebody may care.
Anyone give me the exact price of an EOS290, or a Trumpf1000? What if i get a few? is there a discount. What about if i provide you with data and feedback. How much? Of just some. Perhaps give me the price for a Predix installation? Oh wait, don't let me forget, id like an exact price break down for a Materialise streamics suite, less the CAD section. Once that is done be a darling and jot down the cost of an 8 week start to finish design to build of a heat exchanger, what size you ask? oh just pick one, im sure the cost is just the same... hurry up now
This is not a pack of maltesers at the local corner shop
yeah, let me just look at the glossy catalog and get back to you.
Software updates are part of the revenue model, any upgrade will be relative to its value in the market place. Sigma will gain revenue from machine sales, upgrades and annual fees.
It wouldn't surprise me either if the new Version 3.0 links heavily with the work Sigma Labs is doing with 3DSim who are set to launch FLEX this month.
This will be key for the next step in the exaSIM vision, which is incorporating sensor technology into the exaSIM workflow. With the release of FLEX, users will be able to simulate what various sensor technologies—such as sensor systems from Sigma Labs, IR cameras or pyrometers—see in the printing process.
The researcher tools utilize in-process sensor data without the need for baseline comparisons providing users the data and framework for focused characterization and analysis leading to rapid process qualification and part certification. Quantitative, in-situ thermal history maps can also be used to validate modeling and simulation (M&S) results prior to process characterization studies, process qualification & validation phases, as well as in conjunction with design optimization evaluations.
Having a new version coming out doesn't make the old version a failure. It shows that the company is innovating and staying ahead.
The EAP was designed to attract end user customers who have an existing, installed base of 3D metal printers and to offer them incentivized pricing in return for feedback on initial and beta releases of our PrintRite3D® software Apps
RFB
They had a like PR a while ago about Printrite 2.0......we know where that went
GKN, with whom we are linked in our presentations, as well as via Additive Industries partnership has a new release on it's new additive site...
http://www.gkn.com/en/newsroom/news-releases/additive-manufacturing/2017/gkn-reinforces-additive-manufacturing-leadership-with-gkn-additive/
If some of these numbers and efficiencies dont make traditional manufacturers sit bolt upright and start sweating for an am strategy i dont know what will.
For an industry that traditionally looks at improvements on an incremental basis 3d printing is showing potential to blow things out of the water...
http://www.3ders.org/articles/20171011-ge-aviations-3d-printed-t901-engine-increases-black-hawk-helicopter-range-by-161-percent.html
3D Sim
exaSIM ULTIMATE launched today. Why is this a big deal? For the first time in history, anyone, anywhere in the world can predict the outcomes of metal AM builds based upon a scan-vector-by-scan-vector and layer-by-layer thermal analysis for full-sized components -- without needing to build the part.
learn.3dsim.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/exaSIM-ULTIMATE-Press-Release_26SEPT2017FINAL.pdf
Stay tuned. Over the next couple of months we'll be releasing meltpool, porosity, thermal sensor and microstructure predictions in our FLEX product, and desktop (non-cloud) versions of our exaSIM software.
TCT show opens in Birmingham, only a few hours in and one of the more established journalists quotes
Got here over an hour ago - feel like I'm losing my voice already! ?? Lots to talk about, & most people want to talk production.
http://www.fabbaloo.com/blog/2017/9/22/the-critical-importance-of-certifications-in-the-3d-metal-market?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Article on certification. Printrite3d will help companies prove build quality adheres to certified standards
***The sheer complexity may however
enable those who develop good data
to charge heavily for the knowledge
if it can be embedded in AM design
software. ***
Several analyst reports expect that the direct market for AM will grow to at least $20 billion by 2020—a figure that represents just a fraction of the entire tooling market today.1 However, we believe that the overall economic impact created by AM could be much higher, reaching $100 billion to 250 billion by 2025, if adoption across industries continues at today’s rate. Most of that potential will come from the aerospace and defense, automotive, medical, and consumer-goods industries.
Major governments are setting up R&D funds, including the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program, or are starting capability-building programs for their workforces, as in Korea.
Limited production scale. Because most current AM machines are made for prototyping rather than series production, mass production scale is hard to attain. The next-generation machinery needs to keep reducing production costs while adding capabilities necessary to support industrial production, such as process-stability management, in-process quality control, faster changeovers, greater reliability, and easier maintenance and repair.
http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/additive-manufacturing-a-long-term-game-changer-for-manufacturers?cid=soc-web
Let's also remember Sigma has two long term contracts in the bag
Mystery OEM - 7 year worth a conservative $6m
Additive Industries - Multi Year worth several million
that will start to show up on the books 2018-
Was solar Turbine contract in sight before it was announced? Was Pratt and Whitney contract in sight before it was announced? Was Woodward contract in sight before it was announced? Was Siemens contract in sight before it was announced? Was USAF/Rocketdyne contract in sight before it was announced?
Are you talking about Mark? His lifelong project was not necessarily to be CEO was it really? His lifelong career was as a material physicist, so in reality he is actually moving to focus on his lifelong skill set and let someone else deal with the tedium of running the business side. He is not the first start up CEO to move to CTO and focus on what he does best. Many would consider it a good move for a company.
What a load of rubbish. They are creating a strong ecosystem, growing a customer base, increasing efficiencies, tapping into an up and running revenue stream that is easily scaleable. They are integrating with founding backers in RUAG (the leading supplier of products for the space industry in Europe, and with a growing presence in the United States) and ALTAIR. Morf3D will be a profitable business with or without Sigma. The opportunity to integrate out software with their client base is certainly not a step backwards, and allows Sigma a leg up in its service bureau vertical.
I for one have voted heavily FOR the authorized. Various reasons, amongst which
1. They have telegraphed the main reason for its existence in the alliance with Morf3D/Jaguar which I think is an exceptional opportunity to capture a significant revenue producing entity that the market is wanting (ie an ecosystem to understand and grow 3D printing initiatives). I think it is the right alliance at the right time in the right industry and can hit the ground running as far as revenues are concerned. It’s also a very scalable ecosystem and the cross customer benefits cover a huge proportion of AM early movers making the sum definitely greater than its parts. An 8 week turnaround start to finish for a company that wants to test out AM and then develop their strategy is a very enticing prospect and will be well in demand.
2. They have some cash. The idea that they would authorize the increase then just turn it into cash for no particular reason and squander it, well, they have money in the bank right now, they have proven to be frugal with their spending. It just doesn’t make sense, except to a certain narrative who spells the end of the world is nigh. So logically this is unlikely, certainly in terms of the whole authorized.
3. Can be a tool against takeovers
I think Mark Cola and Sigma did better than many people give them credit for in what was challenging circumstances. Without a doubt the industry timeframe slid heavily to the right. GE who I strongly believe is still very much involved in the Sigma story has had a ‘delayed’ year with a 2 month hold up and refocus in Predix as well as integrating ARCAM and CL strategy. US Naval project was delayed etc etc. I am encouraged to see the company’s recent moves and it is clear they are restrategising. The alternative is sitting still and in my mind that is not an option I want at this stage with the potential opportunity on the table. I didn’t invest in this company to see it sit still. I was and am well aware that the dice could have landed this way in an emerging company in an emerging technology and have invested accordingly, on various milestones. I am in this because I really think it’s an important technology in a market that will become ubiquitous over the next generation. That hasn’t changed and I don’t want Sigma to sit still under a tiny authorized when they could use it to noticeably increase their presence in the market as it grows. Having more shares authorized doesn’t make it dilutive. Issuing them does. Any company needs a certain amount of shares authorized for general working purpose and Sigma is in a position where it would need to issue more anyways. I believe this raise will bring an important new growth channel for Sigma and I am all in.
yes, Sigma's key strength and what industry is really pushing for is making the huge data sets actionable. Data is king... making it count is the holy grail of manufacturing
Feels like some decent accumulation going on over the last month
Just to be clear, 'prosecuting a patent' is different from litigation. .
Patent 'prosecution' is the process of writing and filing a patent application and pursuing protection for the patent application with the patent office. It does not mean there is any legal challenge going on.
Its a strange choice of wording by the patent industry, but well established.
UMM
So all PR3d does, is match the design to the part
'Probably' doesn't cut it when you are dealing with critical parts in critical areas of manufacturing
Actually one of the key conclusions from the second FAA-USAF workshop was the need to focus on the quality aspect. Lo and behold Sigma was invited to present at the 3rd workshop.
With regards to GE there are a few potential routes for PR3D involvement. Firstly is the internal use. GE are fully intending to use additive on a range of scales and products across many of its divisions. Facilitated by GE Store those aspects of internal manufacturing approaching production scale (such as fuel nozzles, turbines etc) I expect will incorporate PR3D. As that use becomes more commonplace so I expect PR3D’s involvement to grow in the virtuous loop of data accumulation alongside commonality of use. As GE are looking to build their own machines I can see PR3D being installed at source.
Secondly there is the machines GE is building for the external market. GE suggested earlier this year they were looking to produce 10,000 machines over the next decade for external customers (Stryker, Oerlikon etc are initial customers) as well as the 1,000 they will use for internal purposes. That is a lot of machines. My view is that PR3D will be customized so as to be easily offered as an option to those that need it added to their machine package. For now via the OEM developer kit, later through installable circuit board integration. This is similar to the deals offered by the mystery OEM and Additive Industries and I expect future OEM’s who come on board. As no company owns Sigma I do not expect them to build with PR3D installed per se, but on demand. I see GE operating in the same fashion.
Thirdly is the supply chain. I expect GE will push its machines on to its suppliers and supply chain as an obvious market for its product. On top of that I expect they will push for, and demand consistent quality and certification. PR3D allows this. As has been mentioned before the Woodward connection was an interesting one with regards to GE’s involvement. As I have pointed out before GE and Woodward have a 50/50 joint venture in place for fuel systems for GE’s large commercial engines. “This joint venture will design, develop, source, supply and service the fuel system, including components from the fuel inlet up to the fuel nozzle for the GE90, GENX, GE9X and all future large commercial engines developed by GE Aviation. Woodward will be the preferred supplier to the joint venture. This joint venture with Woodward and the related program award aligns with GE’s strategy to ensure a stable supply chain to manage production volume growth.” It is especially notable that GE and Woodward jointly appoint the technology manager in the JV. There is also a chance, just on a thought, that the ability of PR3D to use the IIoT to connect machines will provide use for GE to keep track of its supply chain factory floors in-process, allowing more efficiencies, especially, say in a case like Woodward where it is a joint venture.
Fourthly is via contract work at bureaus such as Morf3D who can be certified by GE, using Pr3D to work on contracted parts for them or the supply chain. As an article pointed out recently GE are looking to certify some bureaus for their additive quality and this could be another route in for PR3D. It allows a constant, reliable quality standard across the quagmire of AM processes, machines and materials.
On top of it all, it is independent. PR3D allows an important engineering principle. It allows independent verification of quality so the manufacturer is not relying simply on the machine to certify its own quality. A machine only does what it thinks is correct, so for a machine to certify its work in-process is unsafe. Post process CT scan is another way of independent certification but GE is after, and Sigma is providing, that independence in-process. Something the machine itself cannot provide simply because it is not independent of itself.
GE helped pioneer and build Inspect. They have worked with them on the AM project (within the limits set by the initial project guidelines – including only using an older machine). GE will be well aware of what the new version of Pr3D can offer and I am still waiting for anyone to offer a suitable alternative. In the past we have been told that GE is vocal about Sigma Labs and their solutions at industry events and forums, something that very few people here have any access to and thus can only guess at.
There are other connections between Sigma and GE that reside in due diligence but above all the connection needs to make sense, and I believe it does on many levels. Many of which also hold true for our other partners, Siemens, Solar Turbines, Woodward, Aerojet, Honeywell, Trumpf etc
Yes i agree, they are most definitely not the only game in town, but i still see them adopting Sigma once they are set up for mass production. GE are notoriously tight lipped about their plans, and they have every right to be as they are trying to get an industry/first mover advantage. They have as you say had a few hiccups along the way. A freeze on Predix earlier this year, the purchase and strategy development of Arcam/Concept has taken time but they are now well on the way to their new ATLAS machine program and pushing towards mass production modules. They are definitely still pushing forward, albeit from a more methodical, cautious approach. The senior management changes and stock pressure mean they need to justify their direction a little more prudently.
It is clear that all the big guys are now taking this seriously and a competitive environment is taking shape. Sigma is well placed to benefit from this considering their solution has the potential to offer such huge cost/time savings. Also however, and John Rice touched on this, there is a faster rise in the middle bracket of supply chain companies and new entrants all looking to get ahead, many of whom can move faster, buy quicker and adapt swifter than the big players. These will also benefit from the proposed ecosystem the Sigma Alliance is planning. To really get to know the process, the tools, the designs and then take back to their own shop floors to expand.
Nice to see the latter half of that video demonstrating the mass production side of things. This is the start of what Sigma has been waiting for. I do not buy into the 'GE isn't using us' theory at all. I see their push into this shop floor scenario the start of a big working relationship with GE. Sigma is what will connect all those machines with reliable certified printing and data producing the cost and time efficiencies the whole mass production scenario is supposed to achieve. I do not see how GE can do it effectively using only traditional post processing of CT and Xray scanning.
I would be extremely careful of writing GE off, they have spent the last year perfecting their purchases of Arcam and Concept, moulding it into their vision, and now they are starting to show off their designs and shortly put it into practice. If they really want to create this new process at a speed and reliability now possible they will need to reduce post process to in-process. No one has yet offered up any better solution than our IPQA on a mass production scale. Write them off at your peril.
An interesting exerpt which talks about another important area in which Sigma can add value. The Los Alamos connection, the skill set of the Sigma team is based heavily in material physics. The huge amount of data Sigma is collecting from its own research, its EAP program and customers, DARPA etc are all creating an environment where by Sigma is capturing key data loads for different materials, different procedures, different machines, different processes and different parameters. Their software is deciphering this data and making sense of it via analytics which allows them to deal with the absolutely huge amounts of data generated. This puts them way way up there in terms of data/process collection.
What this excerpt suggests is that one way to move metal AM forward is if the data/info of the intricate, tricky, variable processes and material physics is dominated by a small group (ARM in their case) , could easily be Sigma in ours, then the rest of the industry can rely on their solution for the tricky stuff and get on with the basics that concern them. Having PrintRite3D embedded (soon through a integrated chip/circuit board) across machines would help in as much as having almost pre-prepared parameter sets/data sets for different materials etc from where the machine programmer could choose to then start his own program.
Remember, as we have been pointed out, DATA is king going forward and we are in a very strong position as far as data is concerned. What we are collecting will prove very, very valuable to the industry as well as in a kind of virtuous circle improving our own machine through the feedback loop of data.
Given the large number of process variables discussed in [2], and their fragmented nature, it may prove impractical to adequately control them all, even in the long term. A similar situation exists in the semiconductor industry where a large number of manufacturing parameters affect the performance of a transistor and further parameters affect the way each transistor works in a given integrated circuit. While process control and transistor behavioural models have improved greatly over the last twenty years the problem of accurate process control has been solved in part by companies such as ARM [14] developing huge blocks of transistors and associated components which carry out high level functions. What ARM sells is essentially a complex electronic circuit schematic that other companies can drop into their overall chip design rather than repeating ARM’s design and testing work. Clearly the most obvious value to a customer is the avoidance of having to design something as complex as a microprocessor themselves, but the testing and validation ARM has done with each of the manufacturing processes it supports is crucial to ensuring the design works reliably and enables customers to slot together high level functional blocks like Lego to create a more complex product of their own that also performs predictably and reliably.
Another case of this is starting to occur in the area of molecular diagnostics, or ‘desktop biology’; research has always suffered from an inability to reproduce published results from one lab in others due to a combination of high sensitivity to experimental conditions and the large number of experimental parameters. The move to highly automated biological research equipment, driven by TTP and others, has enabled complete experimental parameters to be built up from software style subroutines of procedures and published via weblinks in academic journals allowing precise replication in other labs. This helps the research community but is also benefiting the equipment vendors because equipment now needs regular calibration and it enables market leaders to cement their position using de facto instruction standards
Max, if i may answer as i have looked into this before and had it confirmed.
If a company on the EAP installs say Inspect V1.0 and then later on installs Inspect v2.0 then it is because they have asked and paid for the new software version. It is not a case of Sigma pressing it on the user, the demand (in all cases) has come from the customer wanting to upgrade to v2.0 and willing to pay the fees to do so.
It is worth noting also that v2.0 is more than just a small change. It is a major enhancement to the web based software.
Hope this helps
An interesting white paper on 3D printing and defense by a top strategy consulting firm. In the 12 page white paper on brief scan they mention just one company by name......
http://www.avascent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/White_Paper_3D_printing_07192017.pdf
The need for production accuracy, uniform standards, and high-fidelity
repeatability of parts are additional barriers to widespread, immediate
adoption. This is especially challenging given the defense sector’s
varied standards and the speed with which some products will need
to be fielded. Given the low risk tolerance for equipment failure, the
need for interoperability with allied forces, and the expectation that
mission-critical equipment function in a wide variety of climates and
geographies, institutional approaches to testing will need to change. To
improve quality assurance, organizations such Sigma Labs – a spin-out of
Los Alamos National Laboratory – have started to develop quality control
hardware and software for powder bed metal 3-D printing processes.
This was an interesting article a while back on the Siemens - GE
https://www.economist.com/news/business/21711079-american-industrial-giant-sprinting-towards-its-goal-german-firm-taking-more
Predix was put on hold for a couple of months earlier this year due to 'issues' which one assumes they have ironed out. That and the management shake up have all contributed i am sure to their AM delays. It seems new management are still positive on it however so one can expect them to continue.
Meanwhile....
A few positive statements about Sigma Labs that are not pumps
Sigma Labs has been invited to present at the Third Joint FAA – USAF workshop. A workshop that will be attended by representatives of the FAA, Air Force, NASA, Navy, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, National Institute of Standards and Technology, industry, and selected other invitees as well as an industry panel provided the perspective and plans from propulsion and airframe original equipment manufacturers and a Tier-1 supplier to the industry.
Sigma Labs have set up a sales network in Europe, US, China, Taiwan, Singapore and Korea to sell the PrintRite3D software as it finishes BETA testing via the EAP program
Sigma labs already has two multi-year contracts with OEMs to embed PrintRite3D into their machines/offer the software as a solution. These will start to kick in early 2018-
Sigma Labs is in Phase 3 (of 3) at DARPA. One of the pre-eminent new technology bodies on the planet. The resulting technology’s will be commercialized widespread. The head of the Open Manufacturing program within which Sigma sits, has stated “ It has already shown that the time and cost required to qualify can be reduced by 40 and 20% respectively”
A multitude of heavy hitting manufacturers are contributing to the BETA testing of PrintRite3D via the EAP program. As Alan points out “The purpose of beta testing is to come out the end of the test period with a robust product that can be fully depended upon in a commercial environment. Only then will it be offered for sale”
Sigma Labs technology is contracted to be used by Aerojet Rocketdyne and the US Air Force to define standards for qualifying metal 3D printed aerospace components. Sigma Labs’ quality inspection systems will therefore assist by defining rigorous inspection processes to ensure that the metal 3D printed components meet the exacting requirements of the U.S. Air Force, and of the aerospace industry more generally.
Sigma Labs has recently launched an INSPECT v2.0, an OEM developers kit and announced plans to enhance its IIoT compatibility. It has also embarked on a new architecture platform and circuit board integration.
Sigma Labs has announced the intentions to build an alliance under the Sigma Labs umbrella which will provide industry with a market leading ecosystem capable of start to finish production in 8 weeks whilst filling an industry need for AM training and understanding
http://client.irwebkit.com/assets/uploads/kit/031da4003532f0f94885df31885bd66c3b6c46fa4a3630d28d7ccf450e91945c.pdf
I think it is more likely just co-incidence. I think they must be going through the pages and amending in real time rather than doing it and then publishing. I noticed some spelling mistakes earlier when i looked and they also have been cleaned up. That being said, i'm sure it is no mere co-incidence that Digital Can main products are EOS and Trumpf and now we are part of the stable. We are linked heavily with both of these and it makes absolute sense for a supplier of machines for these two to also have PrintRite3D in its offerings as well as it looks like we will be heavily involved with these two companies going forward
Yes, and its worth a read of this link that KMEY sent around a few days back which looks at the workshop Mark is presenting to from last session. This is not any old workshop. It is impossible to argue that being invited to present here is a very positive sign of Sigma's relevance, especially considering that last session they highlighted Quality as a key hurdle to follow up, and this session they invite Sigma to present on it.
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/tc16-15.pdf
About this partnership, Kersten remarked, “We monitor the melt pool through a solution developed by our partner Sigma Labs, because they’re experts in that field. There’s no reason why we would reinvent the wheel if it’s already been invented by someone else.”
Daan Kersten CEO Additive Industries, who later went on to sign a multi year contract with Sigma Labs for their technology
RFB (anonymous poster on a chat board)
The huge assumption presented is they actually are a "leader" as I keep seeing it. WHAT!!! LEADER??? Says who??? This is not stated in any publication nore anywhee for that fact outside this board.
LMAO. THEY ARE UNPROVEN!!!
Been a long time since i have been called an Ayatollah of anything...Not sure what the email you were referring to. As far as a buy-out goes... you can never say never in finance. There's a lot of moving parts in this industry and behind closed doors both with Sigma and it's clients.
We know the industry is snowballing
We know Sigma has market leading technology in it's niche
We know the marketplace is racing to establish leaders in the industry
We know data and material physics is vital, and Sigma is top tier in both departments.
We know in-process monitoring is critical to production volume efficiency
so let's see how the market develops.
should be stickied haha
Yeah the dislocation between what the company is building and what the shorts are doing is getting bigger every day. At some point this reverses when the company starts delivering revenues from it's solid base of industrial supporters and sales channels. We already have long term revenue contracts in place, they are just the start. Meanwhile, getting averages i could only dream about, and plenty more appetite...