Sounds good DaReal. Looks like you found the real deal for a proposed split.

All the best,
Silversmith

No. Once Chris denied knowledge of the split, I began to wonder if DaReal simply tried to toss a hand grenade in the room. As you can see, the grenade was a dud. Most of us want a split and uplist.

All the best,
Silversmith

So who is DaReal then?

Things are going to seriously tighten up around here, thank God. Yea baby. Finally we are going to be rid of the penny investor mentality. There is no doubt that this is part of the 'uplift' strategy that Cola talked about. Up-listing is coming for sure now. It is very aggressive. Maybe too aggressive. I was expecting something more in line with 1 for 10, or 1 for 9. I'll go so far as to say that I don't think that it will transact at the stated 1 for 75. That would mean that there would be a float that is less than 10 million shares. That is very tight indeed for a company that expects large growth and widespread exposure. I forget which 3D stock it was, but one of them had to do a forward stock slit because the share count was so tight that it was extremely volatile. The dust is going to fly now.

All the best,
Silversmith

If the coming conference call shows a projected rate of revenue of $2 million per year, then based on the current price to sales valuation, the expected share price comes out to $.128 per share.
If GE did something like a 3 year $30 million deal, then the current price to sales would yield an expected share price of something I hesitate to post here for fear of bashing retaliation.

With a GE deal that same as above, and using a price to sales ratio of half what it is now, yields a share price of $.36 per share.

It will be interesting to see how the market prices this once production contract start.

All the best,
Silversmith

The only issue, wick, is that the volume was probably all from one buyer. I think that someone bought 900K shares today. We need a great deal more activity among investors to make a true market for SGLB. I'll take an up day for sure though.

All the best,
Silversmith

Tacos,
Whatever the end user's inhibitions to using after market IPQA solutions, that is what a sales force is tasked to overcome. It will be SGLB's sales engineers' job to sell to potential customers, even when the potential customer might have inhibitions that must be overcome.

All the best,
Silversmith

Truthandlove,

Interesting, but not surprising. This writing has been on the wall for a couple of years now. It will be interesting to see if he is on the CC next week. I originally took it to mean that the nitty-gritty science behind PR3D had already been figured out when it was clear that Dave was moving apart from the daily SGLB operations two years ago. Nothing has changed my mind since. And his new position probably doesn't preclude him from carrying on in the role he was playing for SGLB anyway. Time constraints and priorities will likely change though. Nothing stays the same for long. We will see.

All the best,
Silversmith

After seeing the Lockheed Martin piece and the use of electron beam, I think an appropriate question to add to the list of CC questions is, What efforts have been completed, and planned, for configuring PR3D for electron beam? We want that business as well.

I can't help but conclude that if Aerojet Rocketdyne, the Air Force, and the Department of Defense feel that PR3D is the IPQA solution to use in defining AM standards for Mil-Spec, that Honeywell and GE, and down the road all the rest of the laser AM critical application world, in all probability, have arrived at the same belief and position. I think we are going to see multiple multi-million dollar contracts coming to SGLB. I think that SGLB is going to be a very valuable company.

All the best,
Silversmith

Your stuff is good kanya. Don't let a poster sway you from the kinds of information you post here, even if SGLB is not mentioned directly. Keep it coming.

All the best,
Silversmith

I noticed as I was digging around the internet world, the Rocketdyne announcement seems to have been covered only modestly in the western world. But there are quite a number of listings of the announcement in Chinese. I would say that the Chinese version of the story is twice as frequent as any other.
Interesting.

All the best,
Silversmith

Very compelling Jackle. Nicely done.
There is more than likely a component to the US Department of Defense efforts that is interested in ensuring the key function of quality inspection follow the third party, independence precepts. They also get the added benefit that SGLB is a US national corporation with history tied to agency loyalty.

Things will just keep getting hotter and faster from here on out. It will be interesting to watch.

All the best,
Silversmith

Alan,
To boot, when I am out for one of the annual shareholder meetings, let's meet up. I will buy you a cup of coffee. You and I are the two sides of the same coin. It is spinning on the table top, and we all are waiting to see which side it lands on when it finally comes to rest.

All the best,
Silversmith

Well Alan, I can assure you that I have not sold a single share of SGLB, ever. And indeed, my broker can prove it.

All the best,
Silversmith

Not exactly RFB.
This is a two part announcement.
This is one step closer to the coffers of the Department of Defense, The Pentagon. Because one of the contracts is for the efforts of AM standards formation with none other than the US Air Force. That is pretty big.

All the best,
Silversmith

I just took out the $.0498s at the ask. The ask moved up to $.05. And what does someone do? They put in a bid for 110,000 shares at $.0475. They are going to spend a little over $5k but won't spend the tick over 200 bucks to put the buy order in at the ask to take out the $.05s. That is exactly what I am talking about with the self-defeating antics of the traditional SGLB penny stock mentality investors.

If everyone who wanted shares would buy at the ask, we would have a very different stock here. This is not some pump-and-dump, death-spiral scam stock here people. If you want to own shares in the company, then buy them, outright.

All the best,
Silversmith

Sigma Labs is very likely to become a very valuable company.

If they can get traction on the munitions and implant front as well, this company can become a billion dollar company in time.

All the best,
Silversmith

Fantastic wickw50. More proof the role-out and exposure continues to happen. I am getting a good feeling about the direction things are going in for SGLB. With in-situ inspection adoption in AM essentially a done deal, we are sitting in a very pretty place at the moment. Now all we need are investors to recognize this and take ownership of the stock.

All the best,
Silversmith

Posting with mobile device for the first time. I hope it works out.
Acoustic is definitely applicable to AM. I know for sure that high level national labs have shown that density variations in weld pools are sometimes missed with non acoustic spectrum sensing.

But let's not get too wound up right now. For sure, the printer manufacturer camera imaging people do not have acoustic, do not have Contour, do not have Analytics, and do not have 3rd party independent inspection status. The entire history of manufacturing inspection and measurement has been predicated on the insistence that certification quality inspection is to be carried out with completely independant, stand alone, 3rd party systems. Additionally, the same manner in which printer manufacturer closed loop control would be interfaced with their camera imaging, would apply to SGLB'S Inspect.
I certainly do not see the printer people's camera imaging as a game over event for SGLB.

All the best,
Silversmith

Here are two more questions.

Sensor based photodiode-array camera systems are being developed and used by Materialise, SSYS, Arcam and EOS and their partnerships, and others. I would hazard a guess that if SGLB patents covered this area of use, that these companies wouldn't have spent the time on developing them. So I would guess that camera imaging is wide open public domain for in situ inspection.
So what is SGLB going to do about competition if camera based inspection is sufficient for the industry needs? The first question is, is acoustic sensing, which is where SGLB patents do provide some protection, actually going to be required, in addition to camera imaging, to provide the necessary degree of IPQA inspection?

The second question takes us back to closed loop control.
Camera sensing in process inspection is going to be necessary at least. And with the printer manufacturers working on their own camera systems, along with their own superior, intimate, knowledge of how the printers work, which SGLB lacks, it is only a matter of time before the printer people figure out how to tie the camera system to printer parameter control, ie, closed loop.
They will crow about it to the heavens.

Now, SGLB was fast to jump on the wagon of 'locking down' a printer parameter-set profile. That no control loop ability is wanted. But do you really think that that is the case? Suppose that you have a printer making a part, IPQA detects the onset of possible defect producing behavior in the layer being laid down, now what? Do you really expect the industry to live with the idea that the suspect part will go on to complete build, flagged for full inspection, Or will they say hey, over here at company XYZ they have the capability to detect defect onset AND make adjustment to the printer to at least attempt to correct the issue. So my second question is, does SGLB still believe that closed loop is not necessary, and how will they combat the need if it becomes the case that closed loop is wanted?

All the best,
Silversmith

By the way, KMey, great venue for a great question.
So now it appears that in situ, sensor based, IPQA is being/will be adopted.
So criticalnugz, a definite question to have asked is, with IPQA competition coming up fast and hard for sensor based, in situ, capabilities by a handful of entities, both printer manufacturers and others, what degree of protection does SGLB's patents provide to ensure that SGLB's PR3D is the IPQA solution that is adopted in the industry?

All the best,
Silversmith

Yes criticalnugz. I have a number of questions. I intend to ask some of them myself if I get the chance to be on the call. I will post some of them next week. I want to go over the exact wording again, some more.

All the best,
Silversmith

A fabulous overview of the current state of the industry, KMey.
Thanks for posting that.
Can there be any doubt that SGLB is smack in the middle of the epicenter of the AM industry effort. If PR3D is adopted by the industry, SGLB is going to be a very valuable company.
The competition is going to be fierce though.
It is very exciting to see this industry being born. There is so much work to be done yet though. It is a phenomenal human species effort to bring this about.

All the best,
Silversmith

It is was actually a decent day of buying GrahaMate.
The real issue with SGLB trading, and a big part of the reason why it isn't moving up with the sector, is because most SGLB investors are the traditional penny stock people. They have been beaten so many times that they insist on placing buys lower than the bid, at the bid, or in between the ask/bid. But never will they act from the point of view of outright wanting ownership of the stock by placing buy orders directly at the ask. Or, if they want more shares than the ask is listing, by placing a buy order above the ask.
The difference between the rest of the space and SGLB is that when someone wants 1000 shares of XONE or DDD or SSYS or all the others, they place a market buy order that usually fills at the ask. When the ask is taken, the stock moves up. SGLB almost never sees this action.
But today, we had multiple buys directly at the ask. The buyer(s) simply wanted to own shares in SGLB, and outright bought them. Yet no one else wanted any for real. So no one was moving the bid up to get some. It was a tale of two types of investor today.

All the best,
Silversmith

It doesn't look like that is happening wickw50. It is one of the things that I watch somewhat closely. The 3D space has firmed and moved off its bottom a few times now. There seems to be a new sense of appropriate expectations for the 3D space. The entire space has moved up strongly the last two trading days. SGLB has moved down or not at all, in total opposition to the larger 3D space, for some months now. SGLB is behaving as if it is completely disconnected from the 3D space now, and has been for some time. I have no explanation for it.

All the best,
Silversmith

HON has a nearly 100 year long history of buying up companies frequently. I expect that at some point they will purchase SGLB. Of course the price of purchase will have to be determined outside of the investor's purview. Investors are showing no interest/capability in pricing SGLB for its potential, and they are forfeiting their say in any opening gambit because of it. Current SGLB investors are small-ball investors, for the most part.

All the best,
Silversmith

There are now three high level instances of global, national laboratory investigation that concludes that visual/optical sensing misses weld pool real time character parameters as density differentials are encountered in the pool life. It is becoming accepted that optical cannot do the job alone. Acoustic is confirmed again and again to excel at sensing ability, though it alone is probably not sufficient either. That would be why SGLB combines the various spectral sensing methods in PR3D.

I am continuously amazed at the very high degree of secrecy being maintained by the players involve with cracking the IPQA/certification of quality for AM build. There is some very heavy stuff going on, and it has gotten serious. Even with EOS and Arcam recent public announcement printer sale wins, they have got to be laying eggs over Additive Industries' attempt to leap over existing methodology for printer ability and control. The predictive and analytical algorithm approach to IPQA/quality certification will be the only way to deal with the volume of information obtained in the real-time sensing method of part build, regardless of whether it is optical or otherwise.

3DSIM/SGLB and Additive Industries are probable game-over game-changers for AM.

I think that with a few more quarters of revenue growth under SGLB's belt, with luck, that they should seriously go after buying 3DSIM.

Things are getting very interesting, and are about to get hot. The accepted IPQA solution for the start of AM production will cause an explosion of growth for someone.

All the best,
Silversmith

HIIGUY,

EBAM compatibility with PR3D has been discussed on several SGLB conference calls in the past. Dr. Dave stated that he does not see why PR3D would not work for EBAM. At the time, it seemed to be that PR3D had not been tried with EBAM. The issue is the difference in laser verses electron beam. With laser, you can mount sensing devices directly above the melt pool. With electron beam, you can't have something in the way of the beam path. Sensing would have to be off to the side. Dave felt that it wouldn't be an issue though. All in all, I would say that there has not been any serious testing of PR3D with electron beam. I could be wrong though.

All the best,
Silversmith

Too funny.
I don't think your point of view falls on deaf ears.
All you have to do is look at the share price. The market believes you, agrees with you.
At least that part of the market that sets the price, the trading out on the edge of things, making the daily noise.
Trust me, Cola knows about it. His holdings have gone from about $7 million in value down to about $1.5 million in value. He knows about it.

All the best,
Silversmith

The 3DSIM arrangement is probably what is going to throw open the manufacturing gates for metal AM production, if they can pull it off in a meaningful way. I am most encouraged by this development.
It is clear that the leading manufacturing companies feel that the metal AM technique is not all that they need it to be yet. There are too many unanswered questions, too much variability, and too much risk of loss in capital expenditure and liability and efficiency and resource. But the industry is being born, the ability to build at a production scale is continuing to move forward. It is messy, for sure. And there will be plenty of casualties along the way. But the cream is rising, and SGLB is continuing to be a part of the solution effort in a more and more confirmed way.

Metal AM will be a disruptive industry. At some point, anyone wanting to remain in business will have to embrace it, for cost competitiveness reasons alone, at least. There will be a day when conventional manufacturing at a main foundry or industrial site will not be able to compete with a printing facility located near the end user site, for shipping costs and time and efficiency reasons alone. And for those applications where the product can be build no other way, at all, but through printing, the metal AM industry will be richly rewarded.

PR3D is not an a-priori quality method. As we already know, PR3D has to be told what proper quality is, then it monitors and predicts when that defined quality has been deviated from in the build process. The issue is that the proper print run and resulting proper part quality has to be known first. Or it has to be tested for. That is where 3DSIM comes in. The metal AM industry is highly desirous of simulation programs that can do this for them. That could be the beauty of the union of SGLB and 3DSIM. If 3DSIM can accurately simulate the build that yields quality, then load that profile into PR3D as the comparison map, then the industry will have what it wants.

For everyone concerned about how slow things are moving, and that SGLB is being marginalized, I recommend that you calm down. This thing is growing faster and faster. I predict that we will see some very big developments this year. But I also predict that we won't see meaningful AM production this year yet. I think it will be 2017. The one and only news item that we have learned about that looks even remotely like metal AM production new orders, is for the new printer machine order. Yet, those machines aren't even build yet. They have to be built, shipped, uncrated, installed, calibrated, and validated before they can even start to make production parts. It will easily be the end of the year before that all happens. SGLB hasn't missed out on anything yet.

And another prediction is that we will see HON and/or GE make a multi-million dollar investment in SGLB, in exchange for preferred shares, thereby driving a company valuation stake in the ground that will put the company somewhere in the 75 to 100 million dollar range. I believe this will happen yet this year.

All in all, I think that this will be another year of positioning for the payoff, laying the ground work. But at some point, probably this year, the smart investors are going to see that the metal AM portion of the 3D printing world is going to take off. I predict that we will see share prices rising for a select group of the 3D printing space, SGLB included. I look forward to the day when the marginal share holders are educated, removed or made inconsequential.

All the best,
Silversmith

If the stock price turns upward from somewhere around here, it will have formed a triple bottom over a 13 month period. That's pretty sound for a base. It is a good place to buy from. I am on the bid for more. One good, hard run from here, and it will be looking very pretty for me. Not that I would be selling though. I'm in this for the long haul. The AM industry established and growing for the aerospace group; automotive, down-well, and medical coming on line, obviously SGLB having been chosen for IPQA- then I might consider selling.

Just patiently(mostly) waiting.

All the best,
Silversmith

There are probably less than 200 investors in SGLB. Only a few are holding firm. It is such a shame that the vast majority use SGLB for a petty cash drawer. I am going to rejoice when this thing finally gets priced above what the average penny investor will play with.
I am predicting that even if SGLB reports a $30 million investment/purchase from GE, or anyone else, the stock won't do much. The current investor base is of a pure penny stock class. The whole base structure is going to have be purged over time before this fruit ripens.

All the best,
Silversmith

I have no idea what you are talking about.
All the best,
Silversmith

Buy low, sell high.
And since I consider these prices to be low, another $12K is in the bid column. I will appreciate it if anyone would kindly sell me those shares.

All the best,
Silversmith

While I B,P& Moan about the ridiculous share price for SGLB, I also know that momentum is building for SGLB.

In my opinion the writing is already on the wall. I suspect that the recent movement by the startup machine manufacturers to do more than just inquire about PR3D for their machines is the indicator that PR3D will be the IPQA winner.

The French Farina Group is a huge materials/machine production industry player. They are global. And they funded a AM startup company of their own, called Sarticus3D, for the express purpose of taking their share of the coming metal AM industry. They didn't even play around with the idea of IPQA. They just flat out bought SGLB's PR3D product for their machine integration. Sparticus3D flatly states that PR3D will enable them to be ahead of the pack with their machine manufacturing.

The Formnext deal, which is still a little hush-hush, is also with a machine manufacturer who is just starting to move into machine manufacturing for metal applications. We are mostly thinking that it is TRUMPF. And again, they just flat out purchased PR3D from SGLB for the intent of supplying PR3D as their machine IPQA offering to the industry.

Then we have Additive Industries MetalFAB1, which is again a machine manufacturer, which again has actually purchased PR3D from SGLB with intent to provide IPQA in their machines.

These new machine manufacturer entrants are in competition with the EOS's of the world. They feel that they can compete, and their intent is that they are going with SGLB and PR3D.

The EOS's of the world are still trying to supply IPQA for their machines in-house. Will it work? Probably not. We know that PR3D is the real deal. So does Honeywell, and so does GE. I believe it won't be long before the EOS's of the world incorporate PR3D into their machine offerings also. The EOS's of the world cannot afford to let new machine manufacturer entrants have an offering that is better then their own. The overall industry machine offerings are being forced by innovation to get significantly better than what has existed thus far in the industry.

I seriously believe that SGLB is about to see some huge growth, and win the IPQA solution business for metal AM, globally.

I believe we will continue to see machine manufacturers incorporate PR3D into their machine offerings.
And I believe that the SGLB stock naysayers and overly cautious investors will get left in the dust.

All the best,
Silversmith

Not that it matters even a little bit, but I think people are nuts to be selling SGLB down here.
While there is a sea of red across the entire market today, I find it interesting that while the broad market has been puking for a week or longer now, the larger-exchange-traded 3D stocks have been inching up in price. It looks like the bottom is in for the 3D stocks.
Now all we need is a more sophisticated group of investors for SGLB. These tiny three, four and five hundred dollars at a time trading on the fringe is clear evidence that SGLB has mostly small-time investors playing with the stock; though I really do appreciate the very inexpensive prices for some big buys over the last week.
2016 can be a fabulous year for SGLB, yet none of the potential is currently priced in. That is extreme, and in my opinion unwarranted, caution. Right now the market for SGLB is saying that they have no chance for success. That is so patently crazy that I don't know what to say.

All the best,
Silversmith

Nice to see someone else proposing numbers kanya.
I believe $0.50s per share is a realistic number for sometime in 2016. I have been grabbing a fair amount of shares in the .05s over the last few days. They likely will be icing on the cake for me.

All the best,
Silversmith

Just put $10.5K in the bid column. If someone selling tax loss would care to part with the shares, I would be appreciative.

All the best,
Silversmith

Plus, I read somewhere yesterday, that the 3D printing and technology mutual fund that was formed about a year ago was dissolved over the past handful of days. I don't know if they were selling shares of SGLB or not, but I bet they were.

All the best,
Silversmith

This is starting to become a hardball game now, almost pure speculation. I suspect that the SGLB market will drive many more weak hands out completely, one last time, before an unexpected event turns this around hard, leaving the scared and cautious behind forever. It is essentially to the point where you are going to either be in or out, and what you have is what you have.

GE isn't using PR3D for production right now. They are constrained by the agreement to only use the IP for evaluation purposes. No PR has indicated that GE has placed an order for production floor PR3D units. GE printers are on the floor and likely ready to go. So it is to the point where the next chip to fall will either confirm GE will use PR3D, or they will not use PR3D to start production. The market consensus is that they will not use PR3D to start.

Honeywell likes PR3D and continues to state that they do. But to my knowledge there has been no indication about what Honeywell will actually be using it for. We do not hear of any printing production plans for Honeywell.

The many other irons in the fire with SGLB and the likes of Materialize and printer manufacturers and evaluators continue to not prominently, conclusively, showcase SGLB when the opportunity arises. No media text includes SGLB when the opportunity presents itself. The printer manufacturers are working toward their own IPQA solutions. Materialize at best presents its relationship with IPQA and SGLB as conflicted with its own joint relations with competitive IPQA efforts. The making of the sausage is a messy, messy thing. The S3 has people thinking Armageddon instead of a legitimate way to raise money for growth, and maybe won't even be needed; but certainly won't be used until the constraints are met, and can be used in much lesser amounts than full consumption of the remaining authorized count.

So the end result is that many do not believe in SGLB being successful. As much dot connecting can be made to point out how SGLB is being shunned as the IPQA choice, as can be made to point out how it will be the IPQA choice. The players are keeping things very opaque.

So it comes down to a simple coin toss; a 50/50 chance. Not good odds for near sighted, want returns right this very minute, investors. So the share price goes down in weakness. But we all have seen how the market has a way of weeding out the meek. I believe that very big news will come out of nowhere and catch many people flat-footed.

I expect to see lower prices and real pain yet, as the last chapter of the ground floor opportunity in SGLB gets read, and weeds out the chafe. It is happening now.

I'll race you for the .04s. There won't be many to be had.

All the best,
Silversmith