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.
Jeff, do you plan to be on the conference call next Tuesday? If so, do you intend to ask John Rice about Morf3d and the comment you received from Ivan Madera?
Kanya, I’m curious. Are you suggesting that after sales occur some will be posting about PPS of $250 ? Or did you mean $25 per share ?
Sigma and its PR representatives cannot promote the stock through press releases. They can only report facts - not opinions, hopes or speculation. You are apt to get much more of a sense as to the company’s progress through the conference call.
We will have an update on the quarterly conference call within the next two weeks.
There will be an opportunity to ask questions. Have you ever taken advantage of that opportunity on earlier calls?
And how do you know Sigma is not “pushing it” to their customers?
Marketing 101 would quickly point out to you, Alan and others that Boeing selling airplanes or Siemens selling gas turbines or Sigma selling PrintRite3d is not all comparable to Apple conducting a very public advertising campaign to introduce or “push” its products to hundreds of million potential customers.
A marketing professor would quickly reject your analogy.
I imagine Sigma provides that information to their customers or those they view as potential customers.
But why would they disclose valuable proprietary information in a highly specialized technological market to their competitors or non-customers?
This isn’t like selling automobiles, pizza or toothpaste to the general public.
Are you referring to the post by Jefftxtrade where he quoted the response he received from Ivan Madera ?
Sigma has existing contracts with GE Aviation and GE Gas & Power ????
Thank you, Ted. That is good news. Encouraging as to future prospects for Sigma and softens dismay over Morf3d situation.
I would think engineers and other technical people would have comfort in the product and the company’s future before signing on
I find the comment by Ivan Madera very disconcerting.
If Morf3d is indeed involved in printing parts for Boeing and other major firms in the aerospace and defense sectors, it would appear they have decided to rely on someone other than Sigma for vital quality assurance.
And, if memory serves correctly, I believe John Rice recently stated on a quarterly conference call that he regarded Ivan Madera as a good personal friend. Well, now it appears that for some reason, John’s “personal friend” has not hesitated to throw Sigma “under the bus.”
I have been a patient long time investor in Sigma, but it now seems that we must add Morf3d to the following list of Sigma relationships that are either dead or yet to produce any significant revenue:
GE
Materialize
Additive Industries
Arete
Creatz3D
Spartacus3D
Morf3d
Jaguar Precision
Enervision
Beijing Yida Sifang
Jets Enterprises
Digital-CAN Tech
I hope Jackie, Visionary, Ted or others will respond with their views as to what they make of Ivan Madera’s response to Jeff.
As stated above, I find it very disconcerting as to Sigma’s future. Is it a question of the product or the way Sigma conducts its business relationships/negotiations? Or, is it simply a non-factor?
Is there any sign that a buyout of the company is imminent?
I realize it is always a possibility, but is there anything in particular that makes you (and Visionary) think that Sigma is “in play”?
I respect your opinion, but I am interested in what makes you think they are selling the company now
Welcome back. Many of us have missed your knowledge and your insight.
What’s your estimate as to when the DARPA report may be issued?
At one point it appeared SGLB might be holding the CEO position open for Ivan Madera if there was a merger with or acquisition of Morf3d.
That no longer appears to be likely.
And even some of the longs who post frequently have been silent. For example, nothing from Visionary since June 6.
I believe there was a posting from DoDeeDee (aka HTRE) which appeared briefly late last week and was then apparently quickly deleted in which he professed he was out of Sigma until such time as negative comments about the company were again welcome. Did others on this board see his message?
Wasn’t the CEO of the Arete partnership a former GE executive? If I recall correctly, his name is Bill Herman.
I wonder if Herman sensed the deteriorating relationship between GE and Sigma and if that had something to do with the fact that Arete never really got off the ground. Was he caught in the middle? Or did Mark Cola become wary of GE?
“Maligned and despised” are rather strong terms. Other than perhaps you and a few other posters on this board, who are the parties that you claim “malign and despise” Sigma?
Thank you, Jeff. Will be glad when this is finalized and officially issued.
Jeff, is this one of the 7 pending patent applications that you listed in your post 58932 on May 9 and TedJ in his post on May 13 ?
The 7 U.S. patent applications referred to those posts are listed by publication number - not the application number.
Thank you for whatever additional light you might be able to shine on this.
You most likely will have an opportunity to buy SGLB at $12 per share but you will have only 1/6th of the number of shares that you would have if you bought at $2 per share. That will be funny
Silver, thank you for such a thoughtful and informative response. I certainly respect your knowledge and your views of Sigma and the industry. Your time and effort is greatly appreciated.
Jackie, thank you for the input. You make some very good points in response to my question about the relationship with Morf3d.
Your perspective is truly appreciated.
Silver, were you on the call yesterday?
If so, I was wondering if there was anything that changed your perspective.
I was encouraged with the addition of technical and sales staff, particularly in the European market. I doubt the company would be adding personnel if there were not the strong likelihood of a prospective return in revenue.
It’s easy to become discouraged on these calls about the lack of sales and the long time it seems to be taking, but I remind myself that there can be no news until news actually transpires - and that then it will be instantaneous.
Jackie, you are always the voice of reason on this board and the conveyor of useful information and due diligence.
As such, I would appreciate your perspective on the relationship with Morf3d.
I well understand that the strategic alliance was thrown off track last year by the shareholders failure to approve the proposed increase in authorized shares.
However, I was less than enthused about John Rice’s response yesterday when he was asked about Morf3d. I understand John has a friendly relationship with Morf3d’s CEO, but it does not appear there is any ongoing business relationship or strong indication of one being likely in the future.
Splits do not affect the computation of market cap.
????? What does that have to do with anything?
Splits do not affect the computation of market cap.
How many splits is “many”?
The application numbers are most helpful.
Thank you.
Makes sense. I was wondering about the fact it was issued in 2005 prior to the actual formation of Sigma.
Thanks again for all the valuable information you provide.
Thank you for clarifying the status of the patent applications. Very much appreciated.
Foreign could well be the reason.
Will you be on the conference call on Tuesday?
You seem to be more conversant with the patent process than most of us, and I thought it might be helpful to all if you asked the appropriate questions and sought clarification from the company.
Jeff,
The 4th patent listed - 6,857,553 - is not included in Sigma’s 10-K as one of the patents that has been issued to the company. It apparently was filed in 2003 and issued in 2005.
Do you know why it is not listed in the most recent 10-K?
The USPTO list of patents issued to Sigma also does not yet include application 201 601 18493 which apparently was issued on May 9 of this year
As Visionary points out, Sigma states it has filed 18 patents.
It appears that 4 have now been issued, 3 are currently in the process with non-final rejection notices and 3 others have application numbers and are awaiting action.
That leaves 8 as unaccounted for. Do you know their status? Are they simply awaiting assignment of application numbers and therefore not yet traceable on the USPTO site?
The 3 previously issued patents listed on p. 15 of the 10-K are:
8354608
8372224
8359979
And, the following patent application number was reportedly issued on
May 9:
20160184893
Thanks, again.
Good to see 3 of the applications now in the process.
With the recent action, including the issuance of 20160184893 on May 9,
my scorecard for Sigma patents is as follows:
4 issued
3 in process
3 awaiting action
Jeff, we really appreciate all the info you have provided from time to time on the patent process and other matters.
As someone who is conversant with the USPTO, what is your interpretation of the “non-final rejection” for the two applications you mention. Is that standard and to be expected at this stage of the process pending Sigma’s response?
Are you now officially changing your alias from Hope To Retire Early to DoDeeDee?
Regardless, it is still disingenuous for HTRE or anyone else to suggest the money they spent for the purchase of shares on the open market went into the coffers of Sigma or any of its employees.
Any money you may have spent on the purchase of Sigma stock went to the seller of those shares. Unless you purchased directly from the company in a public offering, your money has not gone to Mark Cola or the company. It went to another investor or investment company.
To suggest otherwise is misleading and disingenuous.
You have continually stated there the technology doesn’t work and that there is no market for the product, so why do you think the patents have value?