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.
Pretty lame open letter to shareholders in my opinion. They keep wanting something for nothing. When I read between the lines, they are probably pretty zeroed in on what they want to do for M&A, but they can't do it because they don't have enough shares and money. If that is all Rice has to say about things in support for why they should be given authority to increase the authorized, then that is pathetic. I will be voting no.
I want something for it, Mr. Rice.
All the best,
Silversmith
Risk,
I noticed that Sabby Management had trimmed shares from 250K to 235K about two months ago. The shares were listed as sold by Sabby Management. Sabby Management buys equities for a pooled investment, funded by about 10-12 high net worth investors. At least those were the numbers when last I looked at it. That is why the SEC form states that the shares are not directly owned by Sabby or the principle manager. They are on behalf of the investment pool.
This is the first I have seen a position statement about Sabby Healthcare and Sabby Warrants. They are three separate holdings approaching nearly 500K shares in total.
All the best,
Silversmith
Sabby is a hedge fund. Hal Mintz is the principle manager. He's no peep. Sabby invests in places where they expect a precipitating event to occur. That is their investing style. Apparently they expect a precipitating event for SGLB.
All the best,
Silversmith
Been following AMDA for years now. Don't own any. But man, I don't know.... it still looks like the only way to win here is with the highly speculative guess that a buyout is in the future. All you have to do is look at any 10Q for the company. Things are not going in the right direction. This still looks like all the other struggling companies out there hanging on by a thread.
Its easy to bash a company, so I'm not going to do it. But man this is highly speculative at this point.
All the best,
Silversmith
I buy all that Max. I agree with you. But I think anything above $1.50 post split is workable. The big boys know what market cap means, and the lion's share of gains would still be yet to come with a ramp of sales over the next 3-5 years.
All the best,
Silversmith
I agree sales fixes most things, but it won't fix volatility. It will make it worse. Do you really want a stock that moves up or down 10% on the slightest piece of news? Plus, funds won't buy into the stock if they can't buy a meaningful amount without heavily moving the needle. We need both sales and a 6/1 forward split.
All the best,
Silversmith
For what reason do you feel you need to have an after split price of $5? And I am thinking along the lines of a 4/1, 5/1 or 6/1 forward split. I understand what Cola was doing with the 1/100 reverse split. He was after getting the uplist done. But now we have way too few shares in the float. With revenue flow from contracts probably coming sometime this year, the volatility is going to be severe. We need a lot more shares in the float to smooth this thing out.
All the best,
Silversmith
So, if the share price moves up a little more, holds, more or less, how many of you would want a forward split in return for an increase in the authorized? The company is going to need to hear us if that is the case. The caveat is that they will use fresh shares to do things with. Unless they bolt on positive cash flow, it will dilute us.
All the best,
Silversmith
nada,
With the departure of an independent board member late to middle of this year, and John Rice moving over to be the interim CEO, thereby removing his independent status on the board, SGLB had been down two 'deemed to be independent' board of director members. They replaced one member position a few months ago. They have until sometime around mid 2018 to replace the other. Until then they are not fully in compliance with the NASDAQ listing rules.
All the best,
Silversmith
Suddenly, SGLB is all over the internet in various investment stock technical analysis rags.
And apparently Amanda Cola just sold the shares she bought right before she was let go.
All the best,
Silversmith
Automated trading.
For about twenty years now the big boards have been dominated by computerized automated trading. I think I recall that over 90% of all NASDAQ and DOW trades in 2016 were automated trades from investment firms' trading departments.
Once SGLB breached some trigger level, the automated trading probably took over. Come Tuesday, if no wholesale selling comes in, the stock should be stable at these levels. The automated algorithms don't go looking for a stock to sink just because it ran up previously.
That would be my guess.
All the best,
Silversmith
Not precisely.
I own shares that have not, and won't, enter the market for a good long time yet. There is a bunch of the float that is not in the market.
All the best,
Silversmith
A move or two like this can go a very long way to weeding out the traders and flippers and non believers. As the traders and flippers sell for their nickels, the shares can get into the hands of entities that want to outright own SGLB shares. The fringe becomes less and less of an effect on the share price;less and less shares are available for the flippers. I surely hope this is the beginning of a wholesale change in the type of investor in SGLB.
My EU friends tell me that this PR is a pretty big deal. Apparently Zentrum Nord and their surrounding players are tasked by the EU metal AM block to finalize a certification infrastructure for European aerospace AM manufacturing. Sounds good to me.
All the best,
Silversmith
Metal AM would only continue to advance for those parts and designs that can't be built any other way Alan. The cost/profit return just isn't achievable for metal AM vs traditional manufacturing, and likely won't be for the foreseeable future.
I think there are many here(probably most) who vastly underestimate the significance of the IPQA effort and event. It is hard to erase two hundred and fifty years of traditional metal manufacturing mentality and beliefs. The history of metal manufacturing has come so far,and gotten so exact, that there are almost no unknowns in traditional metal manufacturing. And then along comes two dudes by the name of Cola and Dave who started saying that the metal manufacturing industry can safely toss two hundred and fifty years of hard earned learning and knowledge out the window. In process inspection can do the job, just trust us.
There will long be many entities who will never, ever believe that software based IPQA can tell them if a part is good to go. Until IPQA has decades upon decades of success, it will always be a bit of a leap of faith that a part coming out of the printer is indeed good.
And to boot, those two guys didn't start off with lawnmower blades. No sir. They went straight after the very most high-reliability, most difficult to make, most mission-critical flight enabling parts manufacturing has to offer. We are talking about tens and hundreds of millions of dollars, and numerous human lives at stake, per incident, in the prospect that PR3D is indeed capable of replacing two hundred and fifty years of history. It is a mind blowing thing. What SGLB is trying to do is unprecedented in the history of humanity. If they do it, you will be able to read about it in history books a hundred years from now. And you are frustrated after just five years of effort. Enough said about the type of people invested in SGLB.
All the best,
Silversmith
I noticed that this is the first time that SGLB had an investor conference call, and the share price didn't go down afterward. On the contrary, it has moved up. And although we have another month yet to go, there doesn't seem to be the year end selling pressure either. I think that sales are imminent for 2018. But SGLB is a one horse show. The PR3D suite is all they have to offer. It may be enough, but the breadth of offerings from the likes of the other much larger software/instrumentation AM space companies is very large compared to SGLB's. I seriously look for SGLB to be bought by another company before long. I am ready.
All the best,
Silversmith
America Makes seems to me to not be the brightest light in the harbor. I hope SGLB doesn't even pursue this project call. It doesn't look like it much pertains to what SGLB does anyhow. America Makes continued with their projects without respect to technology development. The industry ability was moving forward rapidly, yet they continued with four year old tech from SGLB. Notice that the other entities' long term projects/studies pretty much immediately moved to incorporate the subsequent versions of SGLB's product line. I don't think America Makes is a pedigreed group.
All the best,
Silversmith
I have to laugh at the people who are just now seeing that a buyout at current share prices would not be reflective of SGLB's value. The fringe traders and wannabe investors are the ones who think that a stock should always be priced according to the balance sheet. They are the ones who are setting the shares price. They think that a stock must always go up, or there must always be constant praise from others that SGLB is the holy grail for the industry; otherwise they sell, sell, sell.
The market cap for SGLB is what you say it is.
So what do you think is SGLB's value now? If GEA makes an offer for $16 million, you all are going to be screaming from the roof that that is not fair value. Yet you are the very people who have made it so. Your short sightedness and insistence upon perfection has led you all to think that a proper price for SGLB is $8 million. Of course that is a farce. But what can be expected with the type of flippers playing with SGLB stock.
If you want a certain price from a buyout offer, make it show in the stock price. Stop the ridiculous selling based upon the belief that SGLB is worth nothing just because they have no production sales at the moment.
I am loading more for the time being; wanting to be in before y'all figure it out.
All the best,
Silversmith
LOL Gary. And that's all the franchise will ever make in a quarter. SGLB, as you very well know, has the potential to make that in an hour, hour after hour, each and every quarter. But I know what you mean.
All the best,
Silversmith
SGLB 3rd quarter results -.24 per share. 2017 second quarter were -.22/share. 2017 1st quarter results were -.25/share. Not better, and not worse.
All the best,
Silversmith
And make no mistake about it, the race is on for bringing true closed loop control to market. I believe we will see the first true closed loop systems in 2018. Things are coming together.
All the best,
Silversmith
The quote is from section F13 of the document. I don't know if it is a fresh reference; haven't compared the two docs.
All the best,
Silversmith
Plus another two months worth from the $500K coming due from Morf3D in March of 2018. But if they are successful with the sale of shares from the warrants offering, as released today, at the exercise price, they will rake in another $6+ million in cash. With a little luck, SGLB has options and isn't in as bad of shape as some would like you to believe.
All the best,
Silversmith
From the new Amendment release:
'As such, the Company believes it has adequate working capital and cash to fund operations through 2017, and has entered into significant revenue contracts that are expected to generate cash flow in the near term.'
Wonder what the new sales are.
All the best,
Silversmith
When you read the dpa article, Cola is using, for the first time ever, entirely positive and near-term timeline language. It is most encouraging to see it.
But when you listen to the SLM webcast, three things jump out. IPQA and digital certification is going to be used. It is clear why it has taken so long to get to this point. And either SGLB is going to get a very large portion of the IPQA market, or someone is most definitely going to have to buy SGLB out for the patents. This thing is way to big for anyone to turn away from. I believe that SGLB will be dealing with buyout offers before long.
All the best,
Silversmith
Investors are saying enough is enough. They are telling SGLB that they won't fund the company anymore. For the most part anyhow.
So SGLB should consider a forward split associated with an increased authorized. State that they intend to raise a specific amount of money with a secondary offering from a newly expanded authorized. And declare a special one time dividend for current shareholders of $.02 per share. It will cost them about $150K for the dividend. And start seriously pushing against companies for at least initial sales of PR3D at those OEMs that already know what PR3D is all about. What they are doing at the moment isn't working. Might as well try something different.
All the best,
Silversmith
WOW. There is some amazing transformation coming to the global manufacturing platform. Great video Visionary.
SGLB providing IPQA even to just a percentage of the platform is going to be huge.
There is a quote by Warren Buffet about bull markets. He said they are like sex. They feel best right when they are getting ready to end. But the same probably goes for the current state of things in SGLB land. It seems worst, the dark of the night, right before it succeeds.
All the best,
Silversmith
One hundred thousand preferred shares is a lot of wiggle room for maneuvering the cash flow. They are far from being painted into a corner dude. And I would be willing to bet that if they provide incentive enough for common shareholders, they can get the authorized increase voted through as well.
All the best,
Silversmith
There is getting to be a large amount of foreign nation followings of SGLB. The EU companies seem to be paying particular attention to news of SGLB. Does anyone know if SGLB is currently listed to trade on foreign exchanges?
All the best,
Silversmith
Interesting. Some kind of device app is coming for PR3D. Maybe a metal AM engineer can check up on his build while dinning at his favorite restaurant.
All the best,
Silversmith
PrintRite3D Inspect software version 2.0 is available as a data API platform and enables web-based access to metal additive manufacturing machines, providing users the ability to monitor machines, and capture and record the build sequence. Sigma Labs will soon be releasing a smart device app for the software.
From the latest patent application SGLB submitted it is going to be hard for anyone to circumvent the fundamental IPQA steps to go around SGLB. They have written the patent in such a way that even the most basic operations of scanning a build and monitoring a melt pool etc are covered under the patent. If these patents are indeed granted to SGLB it should lock up IPQA as being owned by SGLB. No wonder Rice is so confident about the IP. Below is a small section of the application:
US Patent Application Pub No.: US2017/0266762A1
Date: Sept 21, 2017
All the best,
Silversmith
An additive manufacturing method is disclosed that includes the following: monitoring a heat source scanning across a powder bed using an optical temperature sensor; scanning across different portions of the powder bed with the heat source to produce a metal part; recording the intensity and duration of scans made by the heat source; generating a characteristic curve from the optical temperature sensor for one or more regions of the metal part using the recorded scan duration and intensity data; comparing the characteristic curve of each region with a baseline characteristic curve associated with the respective region; and determining one of the regions is defective when the comparing shows a difference between the characteristic curve of the region and the baseline characteristic curve that exceeds a predetermined threshold.
A manufacturing method is disclosed that includes the following: identifying one or more regions within a part where defects are more likely to occur during the manufacturing method; recording sensor data from laser scans made within the identified one or more regions using an optical temperature sensor; generating a characteristic curve for each of the one or more regions using the sensor data collected for each of the recorded laser scans; comparing the characteristic curves to corresponding a baseline characteristic curves; and determining one or more of the regions is defective when the comparing shows a difference between the characteristic curve of the region and the baseline characteristic curve that exceeds a predetermined threshold.
Another additive manufacturing method is disclosed that includes the following: creating a metal part on a powder bed using a scanning laser; recording sensor data for scans made by the laser in select regions of the metal part using an optical temperature sensor; determining intensity and duration of each of the recorded scans; creating a characteristic curve for each of the regions of the metal part based on the intensity and duration of each scan associated with the region; comparing each of the characteristic curves to a baseline characteristic curve associated with each of the regions; and determining based on the comparing whether any of the regions are likely to have manufacturing defects.
No T&L. The 'abstain' and 'no' votes are direct no's. But not voting in any way for the proposal is also a no vote. The resultant effectively 'no' votes carried the day.
I am going to write a letter to John Rice recommending that he bring the proposal up again, but this time with some kind of investor incentive. I am going to recommend a forward stock split be associated with the vote.
All the best,
Silversmith
That is a pretty good podcast Rice concluded in New York. If Rice is genuine, SGLB is on the door step of actually selling PR3D. The nature of the potential customer's goal has changed from one of taking a look at PR3D, to one of intending to buy. Good news.
He also sounds like SGLB indeed has a plan in place. I would be willing to bet that someone like a Siemens will eventually buy SGLB. Rice flat out states that they are not aware of any competitive company getting sales traction for any IPQA systems, nor are they aware of any quality assurance company that is further along the road than is SGLB, and that their patent portfolio is strong and good to go for about ten years out. He says they indeed have built a mote around the business of IPQA.
All sounds good to me.
All he best,
Silversmith
It is impossible to know what will actually transpire with the resetting of the notes conversion price and the warrants strike price. The two investors may actually want to activate the warrant option to buy more shares, but don't want to pay out-of-the-money prices. The note and warrant language had these reset provisions in place all along, as do most all convertible notes and warrants. Nothing new here. It could just as well be that the investors wanted the warrant shares at a better price, asked SGLB for a reset, and SGLB got a repayment delay for 50% of the loan balance in return. There is no way to know at this point. It could also be that SGLB breached the clause about maintaining enough shares in the authorized to cover the convertible and warrant amounts. I think it was something like three times the actual amount of the conversion and underlying warrant shares that had to be maintained as available in the authorized, or the investors could insist upon changes. Below are some of the original clauses from the agreement.
All the best,
Silversmith
Effective October 17, 2016, Sigma Labs, Inc. (“we,” “us,” “our,” “Sigma,” or the “Company”) entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with two accredited investors (the “Investors”) for the private placement by the Company of Secured Convertibles Notes in the aggregate principal amount of $1,000,000 (the "Notes") and warrants (the "Warrants") to purchase up to 160,000 shares (the "Warrant Shares") of the Company's common stock ("Common Stock") (subject to adjustment in certain circumstances), for aggregate gross proceeds, before expenses, to the Company of $900,000 (the “Financing Transaction”). The closing of the Financing Transaction (the “Closing”) occurred on October 19, 2016.
The Warrants also contain certain adjustments that may be made to the Exercise Price due to future corporate events or otherwise, customary for transactions of this type. In the case of certain fundamental transactions affecting the Company, the holders of the Warrants will have the right to elect a cash payment in exchange for their then outstanding Warrants in an amount equal to the Black-Scholes value of those warrants or the positive difference between the cash per share of Common Stock paid in such fundamental transaction minus the then in effect Exercise Price. The Warrants contain a “cashless exercise” feature that allows the Investors to exercise such Warrants without a cash payment to the Company if, on any exercise date, there is not an effective Registration Statement covering the resale of the Warrant Shares by the Investors.
The payment obligations under the Notes may be accelerated upon certain Events of Default, including, among other things, any uncured breach of the Notes, bankruptcy, the existence of an event of default of the Company on any obligation for the payment of borrowed money in excess of $10,000 which is uncured, if the Common Stock is not eligible for listing or quotation for trading on the OTCQB or a national securities exchange, a "Change of Control Transaction" (as defined in the Notes), or the Company fails to have authorized and reserved the amount of shares designated in Section 4.9 of the Purchase Agreement. Upon an Event of Default, the Investors will have the right to accelerate the due date of the Notes and the Company must pay the Investors an aggregate of 110% of the outstanding balance of the Notes, accrued interest and any other sums provided for under the Notes.
END.
Driftin,
As I recall it, SGLB authorized a stock repurchase response only for the purpose of supporting the share price when they announced the 100:1 stock split. The amount was for $100,000. Below is from the March 16, 2016 8-K report talking about it. I am not aware of any funds from the cash raise in 2017 being earmarked for stock repurchasing.
All the best,
Silversmith
Stock Repurchase Program
The Company has authorized a stock repurchase program of up to $100,000 of the Company's issued and outstanding common stock. The shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market transactions at prevailing market prices. The actual timing, number and value of shares repurchased under the program will be determined by management at its discretion and will depend on a number of factors, including the market price of the Company's stock and general market and economic conditions.
Critical,
Nothing too much has changed in my mind. I'm just laughing at the current state of affairs.
There is this massive effort going on in metal AM for cobbling together a functional, safe and cost effective process. It is amazing to me how hard this is all turning out to be. It certainly turns out that metal AM for high reliability production is very difficult to do.
There is a large amount of competition across all of the different aspects of metal AM, not just IPQA. Fortunes are going to be made and lost when the dust all settles. The conventional post process inspection world is running hard to come up with a cost effective way to post inspect. The newbies of the world, like SGLB are trying to find a way to break through to success on the IPQA side of process. New software is breaking out everywhere, across the spectrum, for metal AM printing. It is getting to be a little messy and confusing for companies hopeful of metal AM. There are going to be more than a few companies that fall out having lost the race.
No one has a lights-out conclusive solution to IPQA. If someone did, the whole metal AM world would all be piling into it for current and future use.
SGLB shareholders and potential investors are not believing that SGLB can get a meaningful market share of the IPQA business. Sabby Management sold out about half of its position recently. No telling why though. So far, the institutional investors have increased the overall holdings. But no one else is believing. On a daily basis we have a few thousand shares moving the stock down without effort. No one is taking the counter position to create a market. Basically there is no market in SGLB.
One thing for sure though, if SGLB starts to land production contract with some of the big movers in the industry, there is going to be a massive move into SGLB over a number of months time. The fringe selling in SGLB can't be unending. The loose shares are not limitless. There will come a point where very few shares are available at these prices. All of the broken and dispirited will be out of the stock at some point. Then it will be profit time, if SGLB is still in the game, and can win contracts. I have not sold a single share of SGLB, ever.
All the best,
Silversmith
Lol, at this rate Rice won't be a speaker at a microcap investor gathering. He will be speaking at a nanocap gathering.
All the best,
Silversmith
I tend to agree with you on this Alan. It's the age old dilemma for startup companies. The number three reason for failure of a startup is lack of desire for their product; lack of cash and beaten at the game by competition being number one and two.
But it looks to me as though the metal AM industry is going to go with in-process inspection of some type. It remains to be seen what that will look like. SLGB is among the top contenders for being a part of it all. And in some ways they are leading the effort. But no one has the IPQA position locked up, by any stretch.
All the best,
Silversmith
Risk,
There isn't much that my position on the vote will change concerning SGLB. It didn't take a rocket scientist to see that the two previous reverse splits were going to put SGLB in this very position, at the expense of the then current shareholders. In my opinion the structure of the second split was the second of two unintelligent acts that Cola undertook, highlighting his lack of CEO ability. He is responsible for SGLB being in this position. Now they want more dry powder to play at becoming a profitable company, and they want the shareholders to enable it. But my feeling is that if I am going to give it to them, then I want something for it. I want to see a forward 1 for 2 split. I know, I know, they have to remain above a buck to stay listed on the NASDAQ. So my take on it that I want a forward split, even if it drops the share price in half. Get their butts out there and sell PR3D. Acquire a couple of existing companies with profits and good growth potential, at a fair price, with the new authorized shares in a an all share offering transaction, and allow the new acquisitions to help justify the market cap of the company to re-clear the hurdle for being above a buck to remain listed on the NASDAQ.
It has been a very long time since SGLB has done anything positive for shareholders. It has been entirely the case that SGLB has consumed value and provided no incentive for shareholders. I just do not feel that they should be asking for investor compliance without offering anything at all for it.
All the best,
Silversmith
In a way, so far, I have voted no. Not voting at all is the same as a No vote. I haven't voted yet. I'm still mulling it over. The phone calls make it clear they are not talking about the method of voting. And of course they are allowed to try to garner the votes they need. Talk is allowed. Arm twisting or promising things are not allowed.
All the best,
Silversmith
My phone has been ringing lately. SGLB is looking to see how the votes are stacking up for increasing the authorized. The voting poll-group is wanting to discuss the issues with me. I wonder if they have enough votes.
Anyone else getting phone calls?
All the best,
Silversmith