www.gofundme.com/fundlarah
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.
You always want an attainable estimate. If it exceeds it (250,000/mo=3Million per year) great... but I think they're being realistic... (maybe you don't run as much in the holidays; maybe energy costs raise in winter, or summer, etc) 2 million is more doable.
Million, not billion.
Don't be misleading. That is the measure of IF all the convertibles were converted at once- NOT the current OS.
YES- The 'loop' will be 100% 'closed' when this occurs. [It may be now, but for certain then]. Last piece in the puzzle :)
Sweet…. the theory was correct.
Someone floated an idea some months back that last report was so bad primarily due to derivative liabilities, 5m (?<<from memory) of which were a result of promising more stock via convertibles than they had authorized, due to the volatile nature of the price and it being at a particular low point at the time. The theory was that now with the unlimited A/S those derivative liabilities will no longer be there so it will APPEAR as though they have paid down 5m from the balance sheet (even though they haven't actually done anything). I don't remember who it was- Oscar? Oscaro? But found it interesting all the same as a possibility. It may not be QUITE as bad as we think…. and may APPEAR good enough for some new buyers to come in. This is of course just a theory.
considering we are contributing to the nist standards project I would say very well indeed.
On the flip side, IPQA control HAS been done with regular welding (which I think is what they did for Boeing forever ago?) See figures 8 and 9- http://b6sigma.com/uploads/media/aerospace_welding_ipqa_by6.pdf so I guess it's theoretically possible with what they're doing with Materialise, that they've found a way to provide feedback into the existing controls…. It seems like it would really be a software integration/override, so if Materialise has enabled that it could potentially be done….
I'm just floating the idea…. could be way off base. I was under the impression that it was still a human controller for the time being, but after seeing their parts in those images and reading on here I'm now entertaining the possibility.
They haven't announced it- it's been 'in development'…. Good catch!!
I think when it falls on a Sunday it's due that Monday but could be wrong.
WOW Great find! Yes- we outsourced the marketing of it to Allotrope. And Vivek worked out some sort of deal with them to get a higher % of Allotrope's % for KMI. SGLB would still get the previously stated royalty off it which would really add up for us IMO- another flying under the radar source of revenue :) I'm also still wondering what will come of our dental implants with MHTX.
I think it's 5 days after it was due, so Monday, maybe?
I don't see any edgar filings besides 10Q's 10Ks 8Ks NTs etc…. where are these derogatory actions/correspondence Admiral's talking about?
Also- the language he pointed out is in comparison to the corresponding period in the previous fiscal year, not last Quarter.
No-it's i3dMFG- another company. Future partner? :) you can see the same printed logo here- >>http://www.i3dmfg.com/contact-us/
YES! That's it! The part is shown here... http://www.i3dmfg.com/contact-us/
And the GE part was in there too. [see 1st image] http://www.gereports.com/post/74545249161/blades-and-bones-the-many-faces-of-3d-printing
Encouraging :)
I was thinking.... my husband went to a company whose research office was built to impress clients coming to the US and they would literally microscopically etch the company's name and logo into the metal to where when they would look with the SEM it would be there... so maybe we were trying to do the same for the companies whose parts we replicated?
Can anyone make out the logo/letters on the piece in the very very front (bottom of the photo) here? I see an E and an I.... maybe a D or an O- can we think of any companies that might be? TIA. http://imgur.com/4PB9OI7
^ ^ I know it's probably nothing, but it'd be cool if it was done for an actual company.
Witty is gone til tomorrow- PATIENCE my friend!
From the Make Santa Fe FB:
Did we really expect otherwise?
Any bets on Deform this week? Witty should be in office again right?
Let's not downplay tomorrow- Cola described it as:
Lol- I know it's serious- but 'manufacturingBS' cracks me up.
But they haven't developed PrintRite THERMAL yet…..
I believe it does cover it because when they re-applied with specific language that included AM, it was rejected on the grounds that the USPTO said it was materially similar to their existing patent for weld-pool control, i.e. already covered. That is my understanding.
What do you mean last chapter?
I found a few pdfs I'd never seen before check them out-
http://www.b6sigma.com/uploads/media/2008oct_ipqa_toulouse_by6.pdf
http://www.b6sigma.com/uploads/media/poster.AWS-2007.pdf
These are from '07-'08; you may be onto something here….
[Call me an idiot- I never realized that we were a company years before we were publicly traded, lol. That makes sense- I just never even thought about it haha. Was thinking they came from Los Alamos directly.]
JJ- I think you're not getting that you can patent something before it's physically in existence. You patent the method, even while it's still in development. I promise if we had full closed-loop control we would not be at .11-.12 cents. This is why we obtained the patent even before Inspect was released.
Inspect is just verification; Deform is Geometry
P 13:
Stockmama and I are psychics.
More of their Friday news releases....? lol. Hope it's good! Also- is our Q due Tues?
Monkey- you are correct. They have the patent on closed-loop control but have not achieved it yet (unless that is what they modified the EOS machine to be). In order to properly work the closed loop would have to communicate with the printer controls. As it is now, Inspect just gives feedback to the engineers- which doesn't sound like much except when you think about a production setting the difference between having to flag and inspect just one part vs the whole build. Some of these printers are quite large and multiple parts are printed at once; so it might be the difference between one and twenty parts wasted.
They never have. Some just did it on their own- that is, if you use the word 'promotion' loosely. A lot of these investor groups promote things to manipulate the price together, but that's not a paid promotion.
He's wrong.
Their Annual report came out in Dec.
Last year they announced the quarterly April 14th, so should be any time.
They do have an offset fiscal year, but it goes:
January- Quarterly
April-Quarterly
July-Quarterly
Dec-Annual
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=sttk
I think our first big contenders will be GE/Honeywell, supplemented by contract manufacturing for the next 12 months or so…. That said, it's possible our European or Chinese connections may come into play which is a whole different ballgame, and if we really are being added into Additive Industries' products in 12-18 months, those timelines should all line up beautifully for continued growth. Also- I don't know who is coming to our open house (or will take notice when we present with Honeywell in May) but if the military gets involved then that will add to revenue even further.
I don't think it's any need to worry so long as there is progress.
Rome wasn't built in a day-
This is my Microsoft, 1986 play. (Which btw, was once about the same price we are right now ;)) . We are in such the infancy of 3-D printing as a production tool it's ridiculous- give it 3, 5, 10 years and see how things are then.
I don't expect anything TOO huge this year- though there's a possibility that we might see another run like 2013 this year; we're not going to be at $1 the instant GE orders 10 PrintRite 3Ds, or Honeywell gives us some recognition. It's going to be a long, slow climb but hopefully very profitable.
GE is one of few companies with Organization Designation Authorization-the ability to certify in house based on FAA guidelines. It was talked about on here a lot a year ago- I don't see why this is so surprising. GE has a deadline to meet in 2016- probably one reason they've had to go with Sigma- to prove that they do meet any future standards as they are written. [BTW- wasn't one of Sigma's projects via DARPA contributing to said future standards?] The general timeline goal for making the formal, universal standards is 2018.
EDIT: Just saw jpi's post- Good link, jpi.
Here's another about how the process works: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ND/Order%208100-15.pdf
Less than 500,000 volume is hardly a dump-fest lol
I do remember that being on I believe it was a DARPA affiliated powerpoint that somebody posted on here, probably last summer. [I can't ever keep my acronyms straight, could have been one of our other affiliations, such as America Makes, but it was definitely posted on here]. However- there were other steps in between; and Sigma was a player in it. It would take some digging but can probably be found if anyone is motivated.
That massive wall shrinks just a little each day….
What if they end up leading a project one of these days? Metal3DX- true closed loop control, anyone? :)
This means that as paying members it gives them greater rights regarding jointly developed technology- and also more easily allows them to share their technology with others.
Pro: Much more credible/high profile
Con: shared royalties may be in our future.
That said- even if we do have to share- the greater audience/adoption rate will probably make up the difference.