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.
Driftin. I agree with your numbers and you are correct, Mark needs to be grilled on the significant resource allocation for computer hardware. Something else that has not come up is the effect on existing share prices when this offering is made. It seems logical to me that existing shares would sell at a discount to those with a warrant attached (up to the perceived value of the warrant). If prices were equal everyone would sell their current shares and trade them for the warrant shares. I wonder whether there will be two separate symbols. Lots to unravel here.
Seems to me that share price for the offering is going to be based upon the "carrot" that occurs simultaneously (a significant order from GE/recognition as a national standard for quality assurance, etc.) One thing that is bothersome to me is the announcement that proceeds will largely be used for the acquisition of printing equipment. This suggests further servfice bureau work rather than the production and support of software for resale. I think there are far too many unknowns to predict which way the stock price will move . SGLB has a lot of explaining to do in the coming days.
Sil;ver, you are correct I guess I just got lost in all the verbage. The big question is what the offering price will be in order to generate $10,000,000. "Apparently" this is being done without major orders in hand. If they had them, one would think they would tout them to support the offering price. I can't get nearly as excited as you are. This has some time yet to play out so that the end results are a bit more visible.
Never has there been so much paper to say so little. I think what I'm seeing is 10,000,000 additional shares to be offered. Each with a warrant attached to purchase an additional share at 120% of the offering price six moths or later following the offering. Proceeds to be used to purchase printers and materials primarily. Not sure this is at all correct but it is a start for others to add to. It was not clear to me how or when the offering price would be set. Perhaps all the boilerplate wording is necessary but it would certainly be nice to see a plainly worded press release giving a staright-forward explanation of exactly what this is.
Just ask Hillary. I'll bet it's those damn Ruskies again!!
He may very well have seen a need for this guy (although going public has a lot of obstacles to clear)....but if so why retain the other two CPA's plus a business manager? Doesn't seem like a prudent use of funds for a cash strapped company. Just my opinion.
Just what a cash strapped small-cap needed....another CPA. Assuming he does walk on water, as Silver suggests, they clearly do not need an additional two CPA's to manage the books. Hey, money is no object for SGLB. Just ask Mark!!
I think you are incorrect, but at this point I'm not sure myself. The fact that the shares are registered does not make them outstanding. They will only become outstanding when they are actually issued to management as incentives. At that point dilution actually occurs, but at least in my opinion, not before.
It certainly does appear that these are in addition to shares previously authorized. I wonder why they did not refer to the amended number of shares authorized in the Q-1 10Q, instead of going back to the original authorizatiuonin 2013?
"Amendment to Sigma Labs, Inc. 2013 Equity Incentive Plan
The reference in Section 3 to the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan of Sigma Labs, Inc. (the “Plan”) to the total number of shares of Common Stock which may be offered, or issued as restricted stock or unrestricted stock on the exercise of Options or SARs, under the Plan shall be 750,000 shares."
It would seem that these things are written by the attorneys for themselves to understand.
It's not clear to me whether they are making more shares available or less. In the March 2016 10Q they adjusted the number of shares in the equity incentive plan to 750,000 shares to reflect the reverse split (my assumption). Now they are saying the number is 450,000. It's not clear to me whether this is a reduction from the 750,000 or an addition to that number.
8K Announcement outlining Murray Williams employment.
Sigma Labs, Inc. (“we,” “our,” “us” or the “Company”) has entered into an employment letter agreement with Murray Williams, effective July 18, 2016, pursuant to which Mr. Williams will serve as our Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, principal accounting officer and principal financial officer on an "at-will" basis.
Under the employment letter agreement, Mr. Williams is entitled to (i) be paid at the rate of $200 per hour (his monthly hours will not exceed 25 hours, without the prior written consent of our President and Chief Executive Officer), (ii) a grant under our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan of 31,000 shares of restricted common stock of the Company, which shares will vest on the one-year anniversary of the effective date of Mr. Williams' employment (the "First Anniversary Date"), provided, however, that 50% of the shares will be subject to accelerated vesting as set forth in the restricted stock agreement pursuant to which the shares are issued, provided, further, that Mr. Williams remains an employee of the Company through such vesting date, and (iii) a grant under our 2013 Equity Incentive Plan of a non-qualified stock option to purchase up to 63,000 shares of our common stock. The option will have an exercise price equal to the closing price of our common stock on the date of grant, will vest and become exercisable as follows: 21,000 shares will vest and become exercisable on the First Anniversary Date, and the balance of the shares underlying the option will vest and become exercisable in eight equal installments of 5,250 shares each on a quarterly basis following the First Anniversary Date, provided, in each case, that Mr. Williams remains an employee of the Company through such vesting date, and will be on the other terms set forth in our standard form of nonqualified stock option agreement.
Additionally, Mr. Williams will be eligible under the employment letter agreement to participate in our group medical, dental, vision, and 401(k) plans and any other Company benefits made available to other employees at Mr. Williams' level of employment.
Hawk. The hiring of the CFO, the additional engineers and software folks should be a strong signal that Mark believes major orders are imminent. Given his thinking on the earlier reverse split (that it was simply the first step toward upgrading) one can't be too certain however. We'll all know the answer to your question very shortly.
A rough attempt to assess SGLB's current cash position going into Q-3. I'm sure I'll get lot's of dissenting opinions but this is the way I see it:
cash on hand as of 3/31/16: 1.09 million
Q-1 revenue: .4 million
Q-1 net loss .5 million.
All revenue in Q-1 was derived from services (none from software sales). My assumption is that the same will be true for Q-2 (any significant software sales would have been a reportable event). Payroll has also increased with the new hires in Q-2.
Even assuming revenue in Q-3 were to increase by 50% to .6 million and expenses were to increase only modestly we would be left with something like .6 to .7 million cash on hand beginning this quarter. That's enough cash to finish out Q-3 but not much more. I don't personally believe that Mark (or the new CFO) is going to risk going beyond Q-3 without a new cash infusion. Either substantial orders are imminent or further dilution in the very near future is a certainty. Comments/corrections welcomed.
As Mark would likely tell us...."Just one more step in preparation for uplisting". Now, all we have to do is actually sell something.
Pisd. That's a pretty "dark" view of where things stand with SGLB. It is equally valid however with the outlook that the optimists have. As you point out one of the few facts we know for certain is that (for whatever reasons) there have been no sales in two years. That fact alone, makes me lean toward your pessimistic outlook, but who knows we may all be surprised in the weeks ahead when they sign a massive order or two.
Joe: I agree but neither of us are serious kombuca drinkers, and those that are (at least as best I can tell) do not agree. That's all that matters. Whether we can bring on a new group of kombucha drinkers who are enthralled with the supposed health benefits of kombucha and are not married to the traditional kombucha taste remains to be seen. i wouldn't bet the bank on it.
I think that those who criticize Bucha kombucha as being overly sweet and not appealing to the mainstream kombucha drinkers have a valid point. In reviewing the many taste tests that have been conducted (just Google to review) of Kombucha. Bucha has not fared very well. Most often it was not even included in the tests and when it was it received comments about being overly sweet. I recently conducted my own (very non-scientific) taste test of the product. I gathered six serious kombucha lovers (my daughter and friends,all California liberals and serious kombucha users together) for the tasting. It was significant, I thought, that not a single one had ever heard of Bucha before this although all claimed to spend $60-$70 a month on various kombucha products. Without exception they all rejected Bucha as being overly sweet with no "tang" and to them, at least, no true kombucha flavor. The results seemed to track with the more sophisticated taste tests that have been conducted elsewhere. As a non-kombucha user myself I found the several I have tried to be refreshing and not unlike a high quality carbonated fruit flavored drink . My concern is that few are going to pay between $3-$4 for fruit flavored sodas, when equally good ones can be had for under a dollar. To me, at least, the premise that current serious kombucha users are going to migrate to Bucha because of it's improved taste is a non-starter and whether the broader market will be willing to pay $3.50 for something that tastes like fruity soda water is questionable. I hope I'm wrong, but that's my opinion for the moment.
No worries. $2.53 bid.
"that there is another factor that played into them execution such a large RS (pressure from someone)". That would certainly seem like a reasonable assumption, but unfortunately it's not the case. I was at the annual meeting and asked Mark specifically why he implemented the reverse split when he did without the benefit of orders to shore up the impact. He answered that he simply saw this as "the first step toward preparing for upgrading" and was clearly surprised at the markets reaction. I was so astounded I asked him again to be certain that I had heard him correctly and he repeated what he had stated previously. Given this behavior it is not unreasonable to question whether he is making the recent hiring decisions in anticipation of future orders but has nothing specific in the works at this time. Let's all hope that is not the case because, if so, additional dilution is just around the corner.
Come on guys. Talk about clutching at straws. The paper is from 2014 but the workshop itself was from August 2013 (almost three years ago). Given the activity since then, I would not consider this particularly reassuring.
Wick. Agree 100%. Unfortunately for shareholders Mark has gone out of his way to keep SGLB under his personal thumb. Thacker is a passive Yes Man and O'Mara is simply not interested. Until this changes and leadership is installed that is looking out for shareholders interests one can simply expect "more of the same". I'm astounded that shareholders have put up with this situation for so long.
Further dilution will come in Q-3. With the recent hires their expenses have gone up significantly and they will not wait until they are down to their last nickle to dilute. They are miles from qualifying to upgrade, under even the most lenient standards. In my opinion they have only a couple months left to recognize some significant revenue before dilution becomes essential just to stay in business.
I had a somewhat similar experience at a Whole Food's Market in Albuquerque. While there was an entire cold beverage display case devoted to Kombucha, various teas, and other "heath beverages" there was just a single flavor of Bucha Kombucha (raspberry) offered near the bottom of the display. I purchased a bottle to sample, and as others have stated it was certainly a pleasent tasting carbonated beverage, with a mild raspberry flavor. If I had not known that it was kombucha I would have believed that it was simply another of the seeming multitude of carbonated fruit flavored drinks currently available in every market these days. With a price tag of close to $3.50 I do have some concerns about how competitive it will be, not only with other kombucha offerings, but with the multitude of carbonated fruit drinks that it tastes so similar to.
Jericho: Nice balanced description of where we stand highlighting the positives and the warts. Certainly not a "sure thing" as Joe describes it, but very good risk/reward balanced investment play.
mid August
Since the CEO of 3rd Dimension is a featured speaker and SGLB is not even mentioned it would seem highly likely that 3rd Dimension is supplying the software here.
The more than twenty companies signing up for the EAP program obviously saw potential to enhance their 3D metal printing processes with the PrintRite product family. The longer the evaluation period goes on however without receiving an order casts doubt on whether Sigma's claims for the softwares' performance lives up to the real needs of the evaluators. One may argue that the market isn't ready for the benefits that PrintRite provides but I think RFB made a very good point when he said that if PrintRite truly provided the advantages claimed early adapters would begin integrating the software into their production processes earlier rather than later. How long does it really take to evaluate the benefits of a new piece of software? three months, six, nine? When the time period starts getting over nine months to a year one has to question whether the software really meets the needs of the evaluator, and since Sigma is silent on the feedback received we have no way of knowing. Adding more evaluators to the EAP process isn't really going to help until real benefits to the end user are verified by orders.
Knowing we exist without placing an order is not much of a recommendation in my opinion.
A little perspective: New Mexico is a very small state (2 million total population). We have much higher unemploymnet rates than the rest of the country and rank right up there with Mississippi in terms of educational attainment, poverty levels, crime, drug use, etc. Government is our largest employer and we have very little to celebrate in the way of innovative startups. In order to stimulate interest in technology and promote the growth of small technology firms the Albuquerque Journal publishes a list each year of what they refer to as "the Flying Forty". These are the top small technolgy companies in the state that the Journal considers the most significant high tech small companies. I read the article with interest today hoping to see Sigma Labs highlighted as one of the Flying Forty. There was nary a mention. For all those here with their hopes and dreams riding on Sigma's future success I thought you might want to know how the locals here in New Mexico view your chances.
It's not terribly challenging to get a company to accept software on an evaluation basis for very little investment. The real proof will be with the GE/Honeywell orders....should they ever materialize.
I'll go with what Dave himself says on his Linkedin page and what Bloomberg Business reports. You choose your own interpretation.
From Bloomberg Business...."Mr. Dave is a Co-Founder of Sigma Labs, Inc. and served as its Scientific Advisor from December 2014 to February 2016. It's clear Dave had no further ties with SGLB after February. One more exampole of Cola bending the facts.
so.....you find it perfectly acceptable that someone who no longer has any relationship with the company is listed as a member of the management team acceptable? Gee...maybe they could add in Tim Cook and Bill Gates.... that would make the team even more impressive!!
If you go to the SGLB web site you find that Vivek Dave is listed prominently as a key player in the SGLB management team. Only when reading closer you find that he is only an "advisor" not an employee...reading even closer one finds that he is a scientific advisor emeritus. Dave ended his advisory role with SGLB last winter yet they still show him as a prominent member of the team. What is the definition of "emeritus"? According to the Webster Dictionary: "one retired from professional life but permitted to retain as an honorary title the rank of the last office held" It's crap like this....not outright lying, but playing fast and loose with the facts to present an erroneous impression that makes me question most of what comes out of Mark Cola's mouth.
Smooth: While Kanya and I often disagreed on the outlook for SGLB, I can assure you she is no pumper and dumper. She has been one of the most consistent purchasers of SGLB stock and if she purchased shares on the schedule she has announced she is likely among the largest shareholders outside of the company itself. The conclusion she has come to, and I know for her very reluctantly, is that SGLB has no real interest in their shareholders. I think Wick hit it on the head when he said that they are scientists more interested in getting recognition for their science than in making money. The Board as well has proven to be ineffectual in managing the company for the benefit of it's shareholders and needs to be replaced. Additionally Mark's responsinbilities need to be restricted to R&D and a new COO brought in who will focus on making a return for shareholders. Unfortunately Chef and I could not raise enough interest among the posters here to mount a campaign to replace the current Board at the last meeting. I'm hoping that this mistake will not be repeated at the next Board meeting. It is not too early to start hunting up a slate of Board candidates that will be shareholder friendly and get them elected at the next meeting. Failure to do so is simply going to result in more of the same and there is too much money and opportunity on the table to allow that to happen.
The following quote is attributed to Socrates (although it's hard to imagine he used these exact words: “What screws us up the most in life is the picture in our head of what it's supposed to be.”. Not very comforting, I know, but pretty descriptive of how SGLB has performed to date.
Many of you have a good deal of money invested in this stock and I am finding it hard to believe how passive you are about the way the stock has behaved (by the way I am a stockholder once again...bought a few hundred shares in the very low 3's that I intend to sell if/when we get another artificial bounce). Some things should be indispuable at this point:
Mark has the business sense of a chipmunk, and worse, apparently has been given free reign by the Board to make all key decisions.
The Board is decidedly stockholder agnostostic at best. O'Mara runs a management consulting firm for God's sake. A freshman business major would have more sense than to let Mark do the split with no sales in his pocket.
Shareholder's passed up the opportunity to oust the Board at the last meeting. If I were a significant shareholder I wouldn't make that mistake again. If you are to receive value for your investment you need a Board that looks out for your best interests first.
Painful as it might be Mark needs to be taken out of an operating management role and put in a technical role where he could make the best contribution. Whether this involves bringing in a COO or bumping Mark up to Board chairman and taking away his operating role does not really matter, but it needs to be done, and soon, or you are going to see your investment funds vanish in a flash.
Waiting to take action until they are forced to issue more stock to survive is like waiting for the water to reach your porthole before donning your life jacket.
I understand that many will differ with this outlook, but I'm afraid if you don't organize to take action soon you will wish you had if sales are delayed until they are forced to dilute further, simply to survive.
Joe. Thank you, that was very helpful. It's too long and rambling however to be really effective in catching the ear of new investors. I believe that if you could edit it down to simply stress the significant metrics of the acquisition and what it bodes for he future stock price it would be an invaluable tool in introducing additional investors to the stock. You also should consider a follow-up Seeking Alpha article to incorporate tyhose same sterngths.
Is there going to be a trnscript of your remarks available somewhere?
There's no guessing at all involved. They had something like $500,000 + cash on hand at the end of March. The expenses are running at $900,000 a quarter. and they will need off-setting sales this quarter or they will be forced to dilute. They are not going to let their reserves go to zero before they take action and they are now midway through Q-2. Either orders materialize in the immediate future or dilution is a certainty.