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.
ok and who are the top guys in the field that you can hire for < $50 - $75K......ok, for less than 6 figures, (in shares)?
I'm sure everyone would have done some things different, if they were in charge; but they aren't.
The bottom line seems to be more like do you think QMC will be successful or not?
I'm glad that Nanosys and others are helping bring nanotech mainstream. I think as things progress, opex/capex wrt supply will become more of an issue as demand grows.
didn't you know about New Business 101; Reveal & Demo your product before you're ready.......just pure genius
I like; it takes the time it takes, (but get it done right)
believe what they put out or don't. It'd be all about the contract as to what and when.....
.....a Q is a filing isn't it?
Steady Steps of Progress Tell a Story......QDX tm
it takes the time it takes; wait until the filings or $5 on the NASDAQ if you want.
.....I thought you may still be questioning whether QMC is a real company or if real people were involved.
current client(s) seem to refute; "We don't know if they can make dots that anyone is actually willing to pay for."
"our current and future clients.”
http://www.qmcdots.com/press/press.php
We don't know the quanity of dots.
I know some in the mkt will wait for information and confirmation via filings; others will wait for NASDAQ; others still for at least $5.......then some will be left behind. That seems to be the way of the mkt.
I like the Steady Steps We See
.....still haven't sold any, but am looking to get the balance off restriction
GLTA
nice post
....easy reference guide as people do their DD when considering QMC
Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure
On January 27, 2016, the Company issued a press release announcing that the company has entered into a joint venture with Guanghui Technology Group (“GTG”) whereby GTG will invest $20 Million US into the joint venture for building out Quantum Materials QDX™ quantum dot production facilities and quantum dots application development in China. The joint venture will be registered in Hong Kong and operated as Quantum Materials Asia Co., Ltd. Under the terms of the agreement, cash distributions by the joint venture will be split 50% - 50% between the Company and GTG. The Company and GTG will each appoint three members of the joint venture’s board of directors, and Stephen Squires, Quantum Materials Corp. President and CEO will serve as the joint venture’s CEO.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1403570/000101376216001274/f8k012716_quantummaterials.htm
Item 5.02. Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.
Transition of Chief Executive Officer
On June 13, 2016, Stephen Squires, Chief Executive Officer and member of the Board of Directors of Quantum Materials Corp. (the “Company”), was appointed Managing Director of Solterra Renewable Technologies, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (“Solterra”) and, in connection with such appointment, Mr. Squires stepped down from his role as Chief Executive Officer and as a member of the Board of Directors of the Company, effective June 30, 2016. Mr. Squires will continue to serve as Chief Executive Officer of Quantum Materials Asia Co., Ltd.
In connection with Mr. Squires’ appointment as Managing Director of Solterra, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Squires Agreement”) with Mr. Squires which provides that, until such time as the Company records its first $10,000,000 in revenue (the “Revenue Trigger”), the Company shall pay Mr. Squires an annual base salary of no less than $225,000 and after the occurrence of the Revenue Trigger, the Company shall pay Mr. Squires an annual base salary of no less than $247,500. Mr. Squires shall also be eligible for certain annual bonuses and equity awards pursuant to the Squires Agreement. The term of the Squires Agreement is for two years, and provides for severance payments in the event of termination or a change in control of the Company. The foregoing description of the Squires Agreement does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the complete text of the Squires Agreement, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to this report and is incorporated herein by reference.
Appointment of New Chief Executive Officer
On June 13, 2016, the Company’s Board of Directors appointed Sri Peruvemba as Chief Executive Officer, effective June 30, 2016. Mr. Peruvemba, age 51, has served as a member of Company’s Board of Directors since 2015. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Peruvemba served as the CMO of E Ink Corporation and held senior level positions at Sharp Corp., TFS Inc., Planar Systems and Suntronic Technology. He also currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Marketer International, a marketing services firm.
In connection with Mr. Peruvemba’s appointment as Chief Executive Officer, the Company entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Peruvemba Agreement”) with Mr. Peruvemba that provides for an annual base salary of $180,000. Mr. Peruvemba shall also be eligible for certain annual bonuses and equity awards pursuant to the Peruvemba Agreement. The term of the Peruvemba Agreement is indefinite, subject to termination by either party, and provides for severance payments in the event of termination or a change in control of the Company. The foregoing description of the Peruvemba Agreement does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the complete text of the Peruvemba Agreement, filed as Exhibit 10.2 to this report and is incorporated herein by reference.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=71749524
China Deals: QMC VS DIS
Disney has opened the gates to its first theme park in China, Shanghai Disneyland, marking the company's largest overseas investment at a price of $5.5B. "China obviously represents incredible potential for the Walt Disney Company (NYSEIS)," CEO Bob Iger told reporters. The resort is a joint venture with state-owned Shendi Group, which has a 57% stake - a concession agreed during lengthy negotiations.
_________________________________________________
QMC ownership @ 50% Vs Disney ownership @ 43%
$$ invested into QMC Vs DIS invested $$$$ in
_________________________________________________
The Chinese are shrewd and have a LT vision, (like generations).
It seems QMC has the better deal......doesn't it make you wonder why??
QMC: Products To Help Build The Future
Cheap gas, coal won't hobble renewables: energy report
By Marlowe HOOD
Paris (AFP) June 13, 2016
Weak coal and gas prices will not stop record investment in renewables over the coming decades as the cost of generating clean energy drops, a key energy report said Monday.
Renewables are set to attract $7.8 trillion (6.9 trillion euros) by 2040, nearly four times as much as carbon-based power over the same period, the New Energy Outlook 2016 forecast said.
The impact of cheap gas and coal will be offset, it projected, by drops of 41 and 60 percent, respectively, in the price of power from wind and solar panels.
http://www.solardaily.com/reports/Cheap_gas_coal_wont_hobble_renewables_energy_report_999.html
J45, think we will start to see more; Ask Smack, Snack & Gobble in the months ahead. It will be fun to watch Shakers begin to tremble and change their ways. In the meantime, I imagine some will continue to add on dips.
QMC's PR today is another Steady Step of Progress, imo
Know what You Own, (and its' significance): QDX tm
I think nanotechnology will have as much or more impact upon the future as the industrial revolution or the internet.
.....I expect new product involving nanotechnology coming online for the next generation.
The 2nd 1/2 of 2016 should be interesting for QMC, imo.
QDX tm
Looking Forward
would that be Kilos or Tons ;)
http://www.qmcdots.com/QMC-DisplayWeek-AL-5-16.pdf
QDX tm
I'm sure your best is appreciated,(if and when)
....luck w/your theories
powerful thoughts and strong opinion(s) you have there
.....some may agree
wrt news: when no news about QMC; updates about others seem a bit thin wrt all things qd.
We were informed that DD checks and updates were done 4-5 times daily in an impartial and unbiased fashion, but maybe what was meant was around time of QMC's PRs, CES, QD Forum, Display Week, etc.
case could be made not to update anything, (except req by law).
PR's seem to get hammered with influx of updates about others which helps diffuse any potential positive impact.
Net result tends to be neg impact on sp.
.....when no news, updates about others seem a bit thin, (which makes one wonder about impartial, unbiased view towards all things nano), imo
....multiple fronts and locations ;)
just a matter of when
QDX tm
OEKO Institut Backs Renewal of RoHS Exemption for Use of Cadmium Selenide-Based Quantum Dots in Displays
EU-sanctioned report confirms superior colour and energy-efficiency performance of cadmium selenide-based quantum dots in displays
June 06, 2016 10:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time
LEXINGTON, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The OEKO Institut has confirmed that there are currently no alternatives on the market that match the colour performance and energy-efficiency of solutions based on cadmium selenide (CdSe) quantum dots (QDs). The extensive report can be found on the European Commission’s RoHS Exemptions website. The Commission’s consultant thus recommends the renewal of the RoHS exemption allowing the use of CdSe QDs in displays for a period of three years.
QD Vision is pleased with Oeko’s recommendation in favour of the renewal of the RoHS exemption which will bring tangible benefits to the European consumers and environment:
• Better Colour Performance: CdSe QDs allow consumers to enjoy over almost 50% more color than most of today’s televisions and monitors. This will enable innovation in several fields, including entertainment, medical diagnostics and e-commerce. Today’s indium phosphide QD-based solutions fall measurably short of this performance.
• Improved Energy Efficiency: Displays based on CdSe QDs consume a minimum of 20% less energy than any other wide colour gamut technology available today, translating to a potential annual reduction of 7 Million tonnes of CO2 and a net annual saving of 3 Billion Euros for European consumers. These are measurable results that will contribute to the key EU objectives on energy efficiency.
• Enhanced Environmental Friendliness: As fossil fuel-powered electrical production plants represent a major contributor to the cadmium pollution in the EU, the energy savings achieved by using CdSe QD displays would in fact result in a net reduction in free cadmium in the environment. Conversely, mandating the use of alternatives such as InP would actually result in an increase in free cadmium in the environment, a result that Chemsec referred to as “a regrettable substitution.”
In addition to these important observations, CdSe QD solutions can be significantly more affordable because of their capacity to be packaged much closer to the LED light source – something InP QD solutions cannot tolerate. As a result, all the aforementioned benefits will be available to the average European consumer, multiplying the positive effects for business, environment and society until an equally-performing alternative becomes commercially available.
The report from OEKO fully responds to the Parliament’s request to consider all legitimate display technology alternatives available on the market today. The only other QDs currently available on the market fail to meet the technical equivalence test as required by the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive.
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160606005964/en/OEKO-Institut-Backs-Renewal-RoHS-Exemption-Cadmium
EU report sends mixed message on cadmium quantum dots
06 Jun 2016
Consultants recommend 'short-term' extension of exemption from enviornmental regulations for cadmium QD use in TVs, but not in lighting applications.
However, they do leave the door open to a potential exemption in the future, stating: “Where manufacturers can show that [cadmium-based] QD light sources for specific application areas have benefits over other light source alternatives, it would still be possible to submit a request for exemption in the future.”
http://optics.org/news/7/6/8
Patent 7833506 (Nov 16, 2010)
PROCESS FOR THE SYNTHESIS OF NANOSIZE METAL-CONTAINING NANOPARTICLES AND NANOPARTICLE DISPERSIONS
http://assignment.uspto.gov/#/search?q=Quantum%20Materials%20Corporation&sort=patAssignorEarliestExDate%20desc&synonyms=false
....you just never know
Light Conference
July 4-8, 2016
Changehun, China
Committee Members: ....Ghassan E. Jabbour, University of Nevada, USA
http://lightconference2016.csp.escience.cn/dct/page/65578
GQD, (graphene quantum dot)
A lot of companies want to compete, but do you see any sign of 3-10 nm GQD size control to meet some mkt needs?
....point being that QMC's spec orders are most likely to continue going forward...impacting sp at some point
tQD, (CDX tm)
QMC has been swimming in a sea of sharks w/other companies having a head start and deeper pockets.
Steady Steps of Progress seem to indicate future success of contract generating revenues.
The size of the slice of pie will be determined after all things are proven, (including opex/capex advantages)
QMC's current action(s) are the point, as that is what will impact sp vs a maybe if
....though known, glad you posted Kisco info
We've known about graphene for some time. How many products are currently available using 20-40 nanometer GQDs?
How does that impact QMC's customised orders to specs wrt China and Japan?
Some of Nanoco's sh are also hoping for a buyout.....would that alo mean they have the best tech to meet mkt needs?
It's also been known that QMC could produce GQDs, but that doesn't seem to be their focus at this time does it?
Any idea why it's not?
It was also pointed out via SS that one company would not be able to supply the World's needs for quantum materials.
Some companies have been taken over, gone bankrupt, or are still standing.....and that affects QMC's current course of action, How?
In a nascent market, does that information and knowledge really impact QMC's future?
....if QMC's product didn't measure up, I don't think we'd see Uniglobe Kisco introducing them.
might and maybe are a lot like if; so that means every company involved w/qds. Funny, when links were posted including
other companies for DD, we were informed that QD Vision, NanoSys, Nanoco,...were important. Oh, btw and that I had never
posted anything of value.....ironic, that all those other companies are now considered important.
Things now seem to be research papers have negligible value, because Big companies might be developing things in a different
(more viable) direction.
I'd think that one being objective would say that research papers may give a clue of what's happening in a given field.
In 2006, there were 600 products containing nanosize raw materials used in commercial products. Do you have any idea
what the products were or who made them?
It takes Billions to create a new revolutinary market that causes a pardigm shift, so course others will make different
claims, products, and help meet market needs. Nanoco has been making claims for years wrt cfqds.
If no explanation is required wrt other companies; then this msg bd is just about Nanotechnology and should have no bias
as to companies or research information of any kind as it all plays a part....and may impact market share,(and QMC)eventually.
Your response seemed more of a slide, w/o any comment on questions like; "If other companies are going to be brought into the conversation here, don't you think that one should include their pov and supportive data as to why they think it's relevant?"
This was very clearly stated:
1. All things QDot is news today. It all affects investors perception of QMCs value as a company.
....Ok, Exactly how did the sale of DOTZ affect the perception of Nanosys, QD Vision, Nanoco, or QMC?
....as long as it's qd news right? Optics, electronics, pharma, display...just anything qd affects perception, (even research papers).
2. "Discounting news about the market is basically saying you don't evaluate the worth of your investment."
....it seems like your objective opinion doesn't take into consideration whether one uses technical, fundamental analysis, or a combination.
3. "Whereas that might be how you mans your investments," ...meaning me, from your pov or as a possibility
"the rear of us evaluate market, financials, and commercial success to determine what companies we bet and when to sell."
....stated quite clearly as a fact; so I asked specifically, "Exactly how many of the companies involved w/QDs at Display Week have you evaluated their financials, products, and commercial success?"
I am aware of perception, so yes, I'd like to know the relevance of the DOTZ sale to QMC's current path, (as this msg bd is about Quantum Materials Corp).
I'm also aware of the perception by some, that when QMC does a PR we often get an influx of news about other companies qd progress.
Being objective and the voice of reason, would you care to postulate as to why some have that perception?
DK about others, but I find it ironic that in the course of being objective, some ignore research papers.....research papers upon which applications evolve and that businesses are built upon. Will a business evolve from every research paper? No, but every stone isn't a diamond either.
One would have thought, the objective pov would have been: It's good to be aware.
Research applications, (and the inherent potential thereof) are sometimes available to an interested party.
I think an open mind is part of DD, but if something about another company is posted here on QMC's msg bd, don't you think it would entail an opinion or a question?
DOTZ are made from coal, (20 - 40) nanometers in size. That company was established in 2014......a startup from my pov.
....maybe it will evolve as direct competition for all QD companies; then again maybe not.
ok defend away; on one hand company James Tour was involved with a company that was sold......directly involved w/Display Week how?
...on the other, inquiry about Nanoco, (active in Display Week)
and questioned about Mod position, (as if anti-QMC)
....equate those positions w/your comment about all things QD
wrt: " evaluate market, financials, and commercial success to determine what companies we bet and when to sell."
Exactly how many of the companies involved w/QDs at Display Week
have you evaluated their financials, products, and commercial success?
Personally, I think most read about other companies involved w/nanotech. This board is about Quantum Materials Corp,(QTMM).
If other companies are going to be brought into the conversation here, don't you think that one should include their pov and supportive data as to why they think it's relevant?
If you want to make a point about QDs going mainstream, bring it on......if you think the new tech will be competitive; state your case.
too funny, you might ask how some seem to bring up everything but QMC.
....but since this seems to so, just thought I'd enquire about what seems to be some peeps fav, (as they're at Display Week too)
....after all, it now seems that anything/everything that's involved w/any type qd is current research information being made available
...did you have another qd company you wish to bring up for discussion?
....seems to be distract, detract, diffuse QMC news strategy, imo
....I did notice that another's company information was reposted; ie this board now seems to be about anything nano or qd
ok, what's the latest on fav Nanoco?
as it's a fiercely copetitive world, particular in the quantum dots market, are there any other companies you'd like to mention so that information coincides w/Display Week?
If so please explain how you see that being relevant to qmc's current course of action.
one becomes a customer after a purchase
...think I'll wait for future PRs
"esteemed customers"
QDX tm
I'd like to hear more about the QMC introduction.
...I understand
...one tidbit at a time
Looking forward to U-K has to say ; )
Way to go, Trevor
....Keep On Kickin'
On target
...Eye on the real ;)
Who cares? Thought the convo here was to be about QMC.
Henderson's and partner(s) impact on Nanoco and ensuing focus on led grow lights doesn't have anything to do w/QMC does it?
...Glad you're proud of Nanoco, just wish you were as defensive and glowing about QMC.
.10 or as cheap as possible in conjunction w/sardonic sense of humor, imo
thought the action here was to shoot for buyback @ .10
....continue to hold steady myself as sp hasn't changed news or knowledge thus far
QDX tm
CT did have new eyes, (that like to play) on QMC.
...did notice that csti had a plum plucked on ask today; csti moved ask up to .1385 (and still there)
sp still doesn't change our knowledge of the Steady Steps of Progress QMC continues to make
would agree that China news was the fundamental basis for the run to occur along w/expectation of an update from a PR or Q.
...update wrt China news didn't occur, so yeah, sell-off. Think expectation of some tidbit from Display Week is slowing sp decay.
...100's of millions from EU,China,US... going into nano.
China seems to be the only one w/QMC in the middle of the mix, (from way I read the article).....should be worth a nickel or two for LT sh, imo.
.....no blame for those that take the penny in hand, they're making money