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.
How about you address those issues with some facts? You have demonstrated no expertise nor provided competent sources to back up your claims. I imagine those are questions that have been asked and answered, just like the yield issue. Why would at least 5 foundries and Polariton (along with who knows how many other entities) work with LWLG if they were convinced the devices couldn't be produced at scale?
I'm not claiming any specific expertise. I'm just an investor who has taken time to look into the tech and absorb what knowledge I can. Lebby, Leonberger, et. al., are highly knowledgeable and have a great deal of credibility. You, not so much.
Pumpkin and others, like Koog, over time raise concerns that may have some legitimacy, like thermal stability, manufacturing yield, etc. I've seen this over and over in my 16 years as an investor. I try to find the source of these concerns and find out how LWLG addresses them. The ability to properly pole the polymer is the latest. These detractors also seem to think the Lebby et. al. are forging ahead with development without understanding that potential problems that might arise during manufacturing, which I find ridiculous.
So let's look at poling, what the difficulties are, and what LWLG is doing to overcome them. LWLG's polymer is a plastic with chromophores (dye molecules) dissolved into it, which provide the electro-optical (EO) properties. Basically, when electricity is applied to the polymer/chromophore mix, it changes how much light is transmitted through the polymer, allowing digital data to be encoded into a light beam - it "blinks" on and off, representing the 0 and 1 values of digital data. The chromophores are dipolar - they have positive and negative ends (like water molecules). To maximize the EO properties and use them in a device, 3 conditions must be met:
1. The concentration of chromophores in the polymer are maximized.
2. The chromophore molecules must be aligned end-to-end (+ to - poles) in a particular direction.
3. The alignment must be maintained over time and under a variety of environmental conditions.
Poling is the process of applying an electric current to the polymer that causes the chromophores to align. This is a step in the process of making a LWLG modulator. There is concern that this cannot be done sufficiently well in a foundry to consistently produce effective devices.
The LWLG patent application NONLINEAR OPTICAL CHROMOPHORES HAVING A DIAMONDOID GROUP ATTACHED THERETO, METHODS OF PREPARING THE SAME, AND USES THEREOF discusses these issues. The invention (additional of diamondoid groups to the chromophores) addresses them.
A relevant quote from the document: "High electro-optic activity and the stability of electro-optic activity, which is also referred to as "temporal stability," are important for commercially viable devices. Electro-optic activity may be increased in electro-optic polymers by increasing the concentration of nonlinear optical chromophores in a host polymer and by increasing of the electro-optic property of chromophores. However, some techniques for increasing chromophore concentration may decrease temporal stability. Simultaneous solution of these dual issues is regarded as the final impediment in the broad commercialization of EO polymers in numerous devices and systems." So LWLG is aware of these issues, and proceeds to address them with their new invention. (I added the emphasis on the end of the quote.)
Another quote: "Commercially viable materials must incorporate chromophores at large molecular densities with the requisite molecular moment statistically oriented along a single material axis. In order achieve such an organization, the charge transfer (dipole) character of NLO chromophores is commonly exploited through the application of an external electric field during material processing that creates a
localized lower-energy condition favoring noncentrosymmetric order. Unfortunately, at even moderate chromophore densities, molecules form multi-molecular dipolarly-bound ( centrosymmetric) aggregates that cannot be dismantled via realistic field energies. To overcome this difficulty, integration of anti-social dipolar chromophores into a cooperative material architecture is commonly achieved through the construction of physical barriers that limit proximal intermolecular relations." Basically, this says that the chromophores must be properly aligned using an electric field (poling). But, the chromophores can bunch up, and barriers can be built that limit bunching. (The barriers may be the "spacer systems" that LWLG patented years earlier.)
More discussion of these problems: "Nevertheless, the most daunting problem in the production of commercially successful NLO polymers is the issue of resultant long-term material stability. This is likely due to the reinstitution of centrosymmetry as a result of molecular mobility over time. The effectiveness of organic NLO materials having high hyperpolarizabilities is limited by the tendency of these materials to aggregate when processed as well as the thermal stability of those resultant materials. Accordingly, there exists a need for improved nonlinear optically active materials having large hyperpolarizabilities and that when employed in electro-optic devices, exhibit large electro-optic coefficients and high
thermal stability." So the molecular alignment can be undone over time, so a high degree thermal stability is needed to prevent it.
The addition of the diamondoid groups addresses these issues. To quote: "Various embodiments of the present invention provide nonlinear optical chromophores having one or more diamondoid groups covalently attached to the chromophore which exhibit high molecular electro-optic properties and excellent stability. Various embodiments of the present invention provide nonlinear optical chromophores having one or more diamondoid groups covalently attached to the chromophore, which chromophores can exhibit long term stability in their macroscopic electro-optic properties when dispersed in a host polymer matrix and poled, with aggregation of chromophore molecules minimized. Various embodiments of the present invention provide nonlinear optical chromophores having one or more diamondoid groups covalently attached to the chromophore, which chromophores can exhibit improved poling efficiency when dispersed in a host polymer matrix and poled. Various embodiments of the present invention provide nonlinear optical chromophores having one or more diamondoid groups covalently attached to the
chromophore, which chromophores can exhibit increased loading when dispersed in a host polymer matrix." Loading refers to concentration of the chromophore in the polymer matrix.
The rest of the document is a long description of the chemistry and synthesis of the new version of the chromophore. My point is that LWLG is well aware the potential problems faced with mass manufacturing of their devices incorporating their polymers. They have been interacting with foundries for at least 2 years, discussing the problems and solutions under the NDAs, and have provided a solution. Many hurdles have been cleared over the years. If there are still 1 or 2 more, they will be cleared too.
Long post refuting the concept of "sheets" of polymer. The diagram in GP's post is not relevant to LWLG's device. All of the following information is from LWLG's patent no. 11262605 ACTIVE REGION-LESS POLYMER MODULATOR INTEGRATED ON A COMMON PIC PLATFORM AND METHOD. As explained below, the term "region-less" means that the polymer does not extend to the edges of the device, as shown in GP's figure.
This is figure 5A from the patent document, a top view of the monolithic PIC device described in the patent. (I added the notes to identify the components from the text.) Items 55, 56 and 58 are waveguides. Light from the laser flows through the waveguides. Note that section XX cuts through the modulator portion of the device, where light is divided into 2 waveguides.
This is figure 6D, cross section XX through the modulator. Notice again that the "core" and upper cladding layer, both made of polymer, are confined within the waveguide. The text describes the manufacturing process as "forming an etched trench and depositing an oxide layer on the surface of the trench to planarize the surface prior to polymer deposition. A polymer based material is spun on/formed into the desired waveguide/modulator structure on top of or adjacent a laser formed in the platform/substrate."
This is Fig. 25, another, more detailed cross section, along the length of one of the modulator arms. It shows both a passive core (where the light is flowing) and an "active region", which is confined to the length of the modulator arm. This is the where the Perkinamine is. This polymer is confined to each arm of the modulator. It is "activated" by the electrodes above and below it. It causes the ability of light to flow in the passive core to change as the current rises and falls, encoding 1's and 0's into the flow of light.
Fig. 26C is an isometric view of the modulator. The components include:
232: passive core region (in a waveguide)
234: the optical input
236: optical output
237/238: "arms" of the Mach-Zender modulator
246: lower electrode
248: lower cladding layer
This figure only show some of the layers making up the device.
Figure 26F shows more of the layers. Here, side and upper cladding layers were added, with the upper cladding shaped to contain the active polymer, indicated by 239/240.
The last 2 figures are part of a series showing the manufacturing steps - how the various layers and components are added. There are 2 additional steps after Figure 26F, showing additional upper cladding placed over the active polymer, followed by the addition of the upper electrodes.
Getting back to the term "region-less", this from the patent:
"It should be noted that in active region-less polymer modulator the active components do not reach the edge of the chip but are confined within the periphery of the chip (hence 'region-less'). The use of a passive core with EO polymer active components adiabatically coupled thereto results in more efficient optical coupling between the modulator chip and the outside world, and with higher reliability, since the active material is never exposed to the outside world-atmosphere and with higher reliability, since the active material is not subject to optical reflections, rough surfaces, and other effects that could affect optical light transmission."
I don't mind posters questioning the technology - it's complex stuff that has been subject to research for decades. But please, try to understand what LWLG is doing before throwing out irrelevant crap. Koog was concerned about yield - Lebby answered that. GP is now concerned about the ability to scale, I guess because poling the polymer is difficult. He thinks it can't be done at scale in a foundry. This may be a legitimate concern, but, given that we have seen pictures of devices made in foundries, any concerns are being addressed and progress is being made. Lebby mentioned quality control as being worked on. The foundries wouldn't be wasting their time with LWLG if they didn't see the tech as viable.
LWLG is listed in the "Financials" industry category. I wonder who decided that.
There are almost the same number of proposed additions as deletions.
Question on the TRL scale (slide 39):
The first milestone is "Proof of concept prototypes w/ fabrication from silicon foundries (2H22).
The second milestone is "Engineering samples using silicon foundry fabrication (2H22/1H23).
But, devices from foundries are shown on slide 24 - 2 images are labeled "Si Slot Modulator from Foundry D". Does this mean that milestone 1 and/or milestone 2 have already been achieved?
From the application document: "...the present invention is directed to electro-optic polymer devices having claddings with high performance and methods of preparing such devices and cladding layers. Various embodiments of the present invention provide claddings for electro-optic polymer devices (e.g., waveguides, modulators, etc.) with significantly improved performance, including low optical loss, low RF loss, solvent compatibility, thermal expansion coefficient matching and good adherence between layers, in conjunction with the requisite difference in index of refraction and excellent conductivity at poling temperatures."
The figure shows the cladding layers, above and below the electro-optical 'core', where the Perkamine is. What's new is that the cladding layers are made of a host polymer and chromophore different from those used in the core, engineered to provide all the desirable traits listed above. Much of the text describes the chemistry of the chromophore in the cladding.
The patent application was filed on October 14, 2020. The USPTO doesn't publish applications until 18 months after filing - they are kept confidential (by the USPTO) until then.
The applicant can talk about their application, but risks having intellectual property stolen. This is a big reason for the NDAs - Lightwave legally binds others to secrecy so they can discuss technological advances with them before a patent is approved. An applicant has patent rights after an application is filed, but can't prosecute a claim until after a patent is granted.
(I'm not a patent attorney, or an attorney of any kind. Google "are patent applications confidential".)
If Lightwave publicizes a patent application, is it so Lebby et. al. can discuss it publicly, like at an investor conference. They've already discussed it with potential partners.
And yes, this is an indication that Lightwave is working with many companies, not just foundries, to address their concerns and adapt the technology to their needs.
The article tops the "Trending" list on the Digital Journal homepage. Might be helpful to keep clicking on the link to keep it visible.
I'll take a guess at the meaning of today's statement. The "70+ minutes at 80C" statement is included to provide information to specific companies who have specific concerns. Perhaps these are the conditions encountered in a foundry during manufacturing?
A couple of things I noticed from the article:
It touts 25% power savings using a lithium niobate device. We know Lightwave's modulators provide much greater power savings.
Silicon photonics has insertion loss of 15 dB. Other technologies with lower insertion loss are mentioned (thin film lithium niobate and barium titanate), but no numbers are provided. The recent patent (11,262,605) for LWLG notes that their device has insertion loss of less than 6 dB.
The article notes that lithium niobate is in prototype and is 18 months or more from commercialization.
The article discusses advantages/disadvantages of co-packaging vs. pluggable modules. In the PR for the recent patent it is noted that the device is a "complete optical engine that fits into fiber optic transceivers (either pluggable or co-packaged)".
I hope someone with a more technical background can provide more clarity.
Some notes on the PR and patent, and some questions.
In the PR, Lebby mentions "fiber optic transceivers" and "other new market opportunities". I think this is the first time transceivers have been mentioned as a market available now. The patented device can be incorporated into existing tech. This seems big to me.
Regarding the patent, I recommend anyone interested in seeing what the "monolithic PIC" looks like and how it is made go to the USPTO site, click on 'Find it fast', then 'Patent public search', enter the patent number (11262605) in the search field, then, in the 'Document Viewer' pane, click the left-most icon ('Switch to Image View'). That shows the full document, including the diagrams. You can download a pdf from there. Figures 24, 25 and 26 provide the best illustrations I've seen in any patent document. You have to got through the text to find out what the various parts are.
Questions: The figures and text describe the 'active region' as the material where modulation takes place. This, I assume, is the polymer/Perkamine mix, which is only located in the arms of the Mach-Zender modulator, between the electrodes that provide the current to modulate the light beam. So is the 'passive' core just the polymer, without the Perkamine mixed in?
The text describes the 'adiabatic transition' of input optical waves from the passive core to the active region and back again. So the light beam is modulated just by a layer of active material (polymer + Perkamine) lying on top of the passive polymer? I'd like to learn more about that. I assumed that the arms of the modulators were filled with 'active' material.
X is referring to the Polymer Slot 1550nm modulators, to be used for 'long-haul' data communications. The next 2 paragraphs in the report are quoted below. Note the bolded text - LWLG is working with a partner to develop this tech. That language was vague in last year's report. Who could that be?
With the combination of our proprietary electro-optic polymer material and the extremely high optical field concentration in the slot waveguide modulator which is called Polymer Slot™, the test modulators demonstrated less than 2.2 volts to operate. Initial speeds exceeded 30-35 GHz in the telecom, 1550 nanometer frequency band. This is equivalent to 4 x 10Gbps, inorganic, lithium niobate modulators that would require approximately 12-16 volts to move the same amount of information.
We are continuing our collaborative development of our polymer photonic slot waveguide modulators (Polymer Slot™) with a partner that has advanced device design capabilities. We are now designing Polymer Slot™ modulators to operate at data rates greater than 50 Gbaud.
Hard to say. This is Marcelli's area. He's been careful with the money and has managed LPC well over the years. Hopefully we get a peek soon.
Nasdaq shows decreases in positions of 517,812 shares. Did you include those?
It adds up to significant institutional ownership, regardless of the exact numbers.
Per nasdaq.com, institutional holdings are at 9.62%, with 72 holders. That's 10.4 million shares valued at $69 million.
Does this look like the accurate numbers through the end of 2021?
Assuming your source is correct, Lightwave needs to order a production run. I assume this must be paid for by Lightwave, so this is where money raised using the shelf comes in.
Maybe the order is already in.
It would be fascinating to know what a 'confirmation' order includes (number of components involved, etc.), what that costs, and when it can be completed.
The email link for MZ on the 'Contact Us' page works.
The company has stated that they might produce and sell components themselves. The shelf might be used to finance up-front costs related to purchasing a number of components from a foundry (after approval of an APK), plus other costs related to marketing and distribution.
This is consistent with their comments that cash requirements will increase to facilitate the path to revenue from commercialization.
Have you read any technical information on LWLG's tech? Read this - it is the recently publicized patent application for the integrated (driver-less) laser/modulator device. Methods of manufacturing are discussed.
Patent Application
Your question about yield may be valid, but I don't think that just because you don't have a satisfactory answer that anyone should conclude that the tech is garbage. Try asking the company.
LWLG has been discussing the tech with various companies, including fabs, for years (under NDAs). I'm betting that Lebby et.al. have satisfactorily addressed your question already. You can place your own bet, or not.
What kind of deals? The company says in the latest annual and quarterly reports:
Our business strategy anticipates that our revenue stream will be derived from one or some combination of the following: (i) technology licensing for specific product application; (ii) joint venture relationships with significant industry leaders; or (iii) the production and direct sale of our own electro-optic device components.
Per the Morningstar site, the data for the funds is as of December 31, and the data for the institutions is as of September 30. So you are correct, the numbers for the institutions should be much higher.
The top 20 institutions hold 1,325,470 shares. The combined shares held by the top twenty institutions and funds is 2,320,995.
A 'mid-level' discussion of what a PDK is:
https://semiengineering.com/a-guide-to-advanced-process-design-kits/
Agreed. I like to present facts whenever possible as my contribution to the board. I'm sure that won't stop thirdrail from continuing to spew nonsense, however.
Filing a utility patent application provides legal protection.
Basics of Patent Protection.
See the table on slide 3. Protection is provided for 20 years from the date of filing regular patent application.
And When Does the Right to Enforce Patent Protection Begin
"The patent-pending stage means you have filed your patent application but have not yet received approval. You may need to wait as long as a year before your application completes processing. After achieving patent pending status, you will have legal protection, including a filing date that should shield you against infringement if you receive your full patent."
You can sue for infringement that takes place while in the 'patent pending' status after the patent is approved.
For a comparison, I looked up the specs on some currently available lithium niobate modulators. I looked at the products available from ThorLabs and IxBlue that operate in the 1310/1550 nm range, which is what LWLG is targeting.
ThorLabs LNA6213
This intensity modulator has a Vpi (drive voltage) of 5.5V and bandwidth of 35 Ghz. It costs about $5,500.
ThorLabs LN665FC
To quote: "This modulator can provide phase modulation from DC to 40 GHz with a low Vp." Is this case, the drive voltage is 7.5V. This costs $4,950.
IxBlue phase modulator
This is a 12 GHz modulator with drive voltages ranging from 3.3 to 7 volts. A driver components is shown as a 'related product'. I don't see a cost.
I don't know how well these product relate to what is typically used in data centers. But, this gives a comparison of currently available products to what LWLG is planning to market. Quite a difference.
That is an important insight, microchips. They changed the chemistry of the Perkamine (the chromophore) by adding the diamondoid groups. The result is that the poling process works better (the chromophore molecules line up end-to-end better), which results higher r33 values, which means less power is needed for the resulting devices to work. As an extra bonus, the stability of the polymer increases (it's less susceptible to heat, light and other environmental factors).
My little knowledge of the poling process (applying an electric current to the liquid polymer mixed with the chromophores as it cools) is that it is tricky to do effectively on a consistent basis. The new chemistry must make effective poling easier easier to accomplish, simplifying a critical step in the manufacturing process.
My take is that they announced the application, rather than waiting until final approval of the patent, so Lebby can promote the improved technology to both current and future NDA partners, along with the investing public. I also think this is the last key step in the development process prior to large-scale manufacturing.
mennil toss flycoon
Couple of things regarding the patent application (patent pending):
The document describes the problem the 'invention' is solving, stated as:
...the most daunting problem in the production of commercially successful NLO polymers is the issue of resultant long-term material stability. ... The effectiveness of organic NLO materials having high hyperpolarizabilities is limited by the tendency of these materials to aggregate when processed as well as the thermal stability of those resultant materials. Accordingly, there exists a need for improved nonlinear optically active materials having large hyperpolarizabilities and that when employed in electro-optic devices, exhibit large electro-optic coefficients and high thermal stability.
This is the application, not the granting of the patent. That's just a matter of time.
This not an approved patent, but the publication of a patent application. IIRC, applications are kept confidential for 6 months after filing. This might take 6 months to a year to be granted. LWLG is still provided protection for the invention.
I'm guessing that the enhanced chromophore described here is what the company was referring to in the Aug. 4, 2021, PR, where Lebby stated:
"Our in-house team successfully created a 2x improvement in r33, while allowing higher stability during poling and post-poling. This provides not only better thermal performance, but also enables greater design flexibility in high-volume silicon foundry PDK (process development kit) processes. This is critical as we seek to make our technology ubiquitous throughout the marketplace. Preliminary results suggest that Lightwave Logic's recently developed electro-optic polymer material, designed based on customer input, displays unrivaled thermal performance tolerance as compared to any commercial solution in use today. We look forward to receiving feedback on this exciting new material from our potential customers"
The application states "Nevertheless, the most daunting problem in the
production of commercially successful NLO polymers is the issue of resultant long-term material stability... Accordingly, there exists a need for improved nonlinear optically active materials having large hyperpolarizabilities and that when employed in electro-optic devices, exhibit large electro-optic coefficients and high thermal stability."
Lebby seems to be indicating that LWLG has solved the long-term stability problem, with the bonus of providing an increase of 2X in r33.
Also, this is not just an improved molecular structure, but also the "...methods of making nonlinear optical chromophores, their use in thin films and electro-optical devices containing such nonlinear optical chromophores and thin films comprising the same".
So, as they have done in other patents, LWLG is locking down the new molecular structure, how to make it, how to incorporate it into a polymer, and it's use in devices. Game, set, match.
I agree. LPC might be bleeding some shares out, but that's likely a minimal amount. The total shares outstanding number will help confirm this.
That explains why TDAmeritrade (thinkorswim) reports 2 identical transactions, but the volume count only includes 1 of them.
Thanks for the information.
They already issued a prospectus. That was the S-3 filing on July 2 for the shelf of $100,000,000.
On October 7, they filed a 'Prospectus Supplement' to the July prospectus for the $33,000,000 that is for the LPC agreement. It includes this statement:
"This prospectus supplement is part of a registration statement that we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), using a “shelf” registration process. Under the shelf registration process, we may from time to time offer and sell any combination of the securities described in the accompanying prospectus up to a total dollar amount of $100,000,000 of which this offering is a part."
So the LPC deal is part of the shelf. My reading of the documents could be wrong - I'm no expert on these things - but the LPC deal appears to be part of the whole.
The entire $100,000,000, at $17/share, would equate to 5.88 million shares. This doesn't cover all the recent volume. Also, I don't think the company has cashed the whole shelf in already (my opinion, but it doesn't make sense to be that they would).
So some of the volume is probably related to the shelf, but certainly not all of it.
Per the "prospectus supplement" issued on October 5, the shares are part of shelf:
This prospectus supplement is part of a registration statement that we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), using a “shelf” registration process. Under the shelf registration process, we may from time to time offer and sell any combination of the securities described in the accompanying prospectus up to a total dollar amount of $100,000,000 of which this offering is a part.
LPC was allowed to buy $3,000,000 worth of shares at $9.16 per share in early October (see the October 7 press release). This is about 327,000 shares. They can sell these when they want. I assume they already sold them.
The remaining $30,000,000 dollars in the agreement will be made up of shares sold by LWLG to LPC, whenever LWLG decides to sell them. So who knows if any additional shares have been subsequently sold by LPC.
Then there's the remaining $67,000,000 of the shelf (remember, the shelf totals $100,000,000 - the number of shares depends on the share price). We have no idea what has or hasn't happened with those funds.
dude - I agree with your line of thinking. I asked questions about where the shares in the dark pools come from (bought on public exchanges) to make the same conclusion you did - that the public float is shrinking.
The total float is increasing somewhat due to LPC selling some new shares allocated from the shelf. However, it appears the dark pool trading volumes are exceeding the dilution. If these shares are going to long-term investors, like institutions, then yes, there will be even fewer shares available when demand increases.
Hopefully, it won't be long before that conclusion is verified.
Let's try to define the shelf properly. I'm spit-balling here, so if anyone can refine these numbers, please chime in.
The shelf is for $100,000,000 total (dollars, not shares). The deal with LPC is for $33,000,000 (dollars, not shares). LPC purchased $3,000,000 at $9.16/share in early October. That's 327,511 shares, which they presumably are selling, or have sold, for a profit.
That leaves $30,000,000 left on the LPC deal. At $17/share (just to pick a more or less average recent price), that's 1,764,705 shares to be sold to LPC at LWLG's discretion. As the PPS gets higher, fewer shares are available.
That leaves $67,000,000 remaining in the shelf. At $17/share, that's 3,941,176 shares that LWLG can sell on NASDAQ or allocate to a partner or institution, or ??. Again, as the PPS rises, fewer shares are available.
That's about 6,000,000 shares. The number is a rough estimate (+/- a million or two), based on an assumption of the average selling price, but it provides a ballpark of how many shares are related to the shelf. LWLG may never sell them all. It's also represents the potential increase in outstanding shares.
The increase in outstanding shares is likely due to LPC selling with LWLG's blessing. I assume LWLG is not going to push large numbers of shares onto the market at any one time, so as not to push the PPS down.
Hollerith cards! Took a Fortran class, too. Spent too many hours in the basement of the Comp Sci building.
Drove straight through from SW Colorado to Tucson (U of Az) with some Zoology grad students in an old Suburban with no A/C, going to a conference that started on a Sunday. This was 1979-ish. It was around Aug. 1, so the overnight temp was like 95 degrees. We got to campus at 5 in the morning with no where to go. We all wanted to clean up a little. I told them that if there was 1 building open at that time, it would be the Comp Sci building. Sure 'nuff, it was open and we got to use the bathrooms.