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.
Have any shareholders on this board received the press release from Core IR?
I have previously asked both Bret Shapiro and Scott Gordon to be included on the distribution list for any news releases. Both indicated they would do so, but apparently to no avail.
I realize the press releases are available on the website and by postings on this iHub board, but an email from Core IR would usually be a quicker source of important developments involving our interests.
Frankly, Chris Witty seemed to be more responsive to shareholders' requests.
It is certainly plausible that there are 30 or more individual investors with holdings averaging 45,000 shares or more.
But why is it important that you know who they are?
Thank you for your explanation and description of the America Makes video to which you had made reference.
And, again, thank you for all your contributions to this board. I really appreciate your informed views on the sector and on Sigma in particular.
I realize it is only conjecture, but when do you think Phase 3 of DARPA will be completed and results announced?
Is the American Makes video publicly available ? I have not been able to locate it on their website.
What is the status of the merger or alliance with Morf3d?
Little has been said recently about the proposed merger or alliance with Morf3D. Is it still being pursued by SGLB ?
How do you know it is a "worthless TDA"?
Isn't that purely a speculative opinion and not fact?
Thank you for all your contributions to this board. Your knowledge and research have been a great benefit - and a voice of reason.
Does anyone on this board know what the current status is of the proposed merger or alliance with Morf3D?
I don't understand your point. "If the MC was still around 103" the price per share would be around $21.50, so current investors would not be buying at a fraction of what most original investors paid
Perhaps you should re-calculate.
If your break even point is $500 per share, you are inferring that your split adjusted cost per share was $2.50.
Many of us were accumulating shares prior to the first reverse split at 5 to 25 cents per share. That would make our current break even point $10 to $50 per share - NOT $500.
When do those of you on this board expect the final report to be issued on the America Makes 4027 project?
Why are we seeing so many trades in the last week or so for 1, 2, 3 and 4 shares?
Sorry, previous post was short circuited.
What I intended to ask was:
So, you would exercise (buy) at $4.13 and then sell at today's prices?
That seems to be what you infer in your dialogue
So, you would exercising (buying ) at $4.13
Well stated. I concur with your "speculation."
I agree. I view this as positive. The company gets to keep the proceeds from what was originally a loan and removes the debt; and the original note holders opt to convert to equity because they think the value of Sigma's stock will increase.
As for present shareholders, yes, there is some dilution by virtue of the increase in outstanding shares, but this is offset by increase in book value with elimination of the debt.
Thanks.
When are final reports expected from America Makes and DARPA 3 and what will the likely impact be for Sigma?
Does Materialize's business with GE mean that Sigma is no longer in "lock step" with GEA?
Has Morf received delivery of the printer they wet to obtain with the $500,000 loan from Sigma?
Has Sigma purchased additional printers?
Has Sigma paid off last year's $1M loan?
Sorry, Alan, I did not see the decimal in front of the "5 million $$."
A lot of your comments are inaccurate factually.
The loan to Morf was $500,000 - not $5,000,000.
And the recent stock offering was not an IPO.
Your tendency to misstate facts seriously impacts your credibility.
You appear to have changed your tune again.
As recently as April 25 you were seeking (taking?) credit for moving the market for the warrants upwards in price and volume.
For several weeks prior to that your postings reflected a position bent on the stock. Before that you were decidedly negative. Which is it?
P.S. You might also brush up on your understanding of outstanding shares vs. authorized shares and on what financial information is contained in a company's balance sheet. Your comments frequently reflect you either don't understand or choose to misrepresent.
You better do the math again. You are really short changing yourself.
The stock and warrants will basically move in lock step (to use a familiar term) once the stock price exceeds $4.00. The warrants will gain $1.00 for every $1.00 increase in the common.
The difference is that's for the same initial investment at today's prices you will have 3 times more warrants than common stock. If you ultimately sell the warrants (at any price) and buy the common, you are reducing your potential gain by 2/3rds.
But it's your money. Do what you want
You would be making a big mistake in the scenario you outline.
If you bought 3 warrants now at $1.00
and sold when the share price reached $6.00, you would receive about $7.50 ($6.00 - 4.00 + 0.50 premium x 3).
That $7.50 would enable you to buy 1.25 shares of common at $6.00.
If the common reached $100, you would realize $125 for your 1.25 shares.
If you held onto the 3 warrants instead of selling at $6.00, you would realize about $288 when the price of the common reached $100 ($100 - 4 x 3). We assume in this case the premium would be virtually nil when the pps reached $100.
It makes no sense to sell the warrants simply because the common exceeds the $4 exercise price. You need to consider that you are holding 3 times as many warrants for the same buy in price as one share of common at current prices
Warrants are always going to be priced at PPS - $4.00 + premium.
The premium will generally be between $0.50 and $1.50 depending on (a) volatility, (b) time remaining before expiration and (c) how far the warrants are in or out of the money (above or below $4.00).
There really is no need for a chart.
If the share price is $14, the warrants will likely be between $10.50 and $11.50 (depending on the premium).
If the share price is $20, the warrants will be between $16.50 and $17.50.
Your comments don't make much sense.
A reverse split results in a decrease in the number of issued shares. An increase in the number of authorized shares might eventually be used for a forward split - but certainly not for a r/s.
And I would think Sigma would be thrilled to have the warrants exercised and converted. That would mean that the share price was greater than $4.00 and the company would receive $4.00 for each warrant converted.
If the warrants were not exercised and converted that would mean the share price was less than $4.00 and the company would receive no cash for converting.
If you have not already done so, I suggest you read post 49810 by KMey3434. He makes a compelling point about the need to increase the authorized shares as an anti-takeover measure.
Scott responded to my email promptly and courteously
If Catepillar, GE, Honeywell or any institutional investor wanted to buy a 20% stake in Sigma, where would they get the shares?
That's one reason why the authorized shares have to be increased.
Another reason would be if there was an opportunity for Sigma to acquire or merge with another company that would complement its present business and increase revenues.
Those are two reasons why it is prudent for Sigma to have authorized
shares in reserve that may. Ebusdued when it is in the best
Thank you for your response. I found it interesting and appreciate your taking the time to explain your position.
I first invested in Sigma and started following this board in April 2014. Subsequently I have categorized for my own benefit some of the frequent posters in order to help me value their comments accordingly.
From the onset I had you in the extremely bearish camp and your comments all during this time have not dissuaded me from that initial classification. You have been consistently bearish, as is your right.
And how do you know what positions the current board members have taken on various issues? Unless you are privy to all the internal discussions, how can you say they have taken "no interest." Again you simply make assumptions and discredit.
If that is the way you feel, why do you hang around on this board?
There is no smoking gun. There is no need for a witch hunt. The facts are all contained in the proxy and well summarized in post 49881.
I doubt you are on position to pass judgment on what responsibilities
Founders of companies usually have been granted a personal stake in the ownership and earn additional stakes as "sweat equity."
You ask what I think. I think you may have " an ax to grind" with Mark over some personal or business grievance. It appears that perhaps you feel you may have been cut out or ignored in some deal.
As I just responded on another post, Amanda had 20 years experience with the Los Alamos National Lab. Presumably that speaks to her experience and qualifications. To suggest that she is on the payroll only as a result of nepotism seems inaccurate and unfair and a blatant attempt to demean and discredit.
The proxy states that Amanda Cola had 20 years experience (1994-2014) with the Los Alamos National Lab and served in a number of roles including finance and procurement for various projects. The 20-year term with a prestigious national lab seemingly suggests that she is experienced and qualified. Why would you think otherwise?
To term Mark and Amanda Cola as "slimeballs" is far more than registering concern or leveling criticism. It is a spiteful term and brings into question the objectivity of those uttering such comment.
You assume the authorized but unissued shares will be used for some nefarious purpose.
I tend to think it is prudent planning for the future so that Sigma is in position to capitalize on opportunities that arise that would be in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.
This could take the form of acquisitions or mergers or the selling of a sizable stake in the company to an institutional investor or major player in the industry.
Sigma can't act in a timely manner on such opportunities if they don't have the shares to proffer. I think they have made a prudent decision to prepare for future eventualities.
We may not all agree on past decisions and there have certainly been disappointments but I don't for a minute think the company, its officers and directors are sitting back scheming on ways to screw the shareholders.
Most of them have a larger position in the number of common shares than the rest of us and much more to gain (or lose) depending on the pps. It just stands to reason they want the company to succeed and for the share price to rise dramatically.
Wow ! To label Mark and Amanda Cola as "slimeballs" might suggest you have an intense dislike for them.
I hope this will not color your objectivity and prompt you to use this board to discredit, demean and disparage the Colas in order to address a personal animosity. To do so would be a disservice to all on this board.
Alan, it appears you value accuracy and forthrightness, so I think it appropriate that we point out that you have misstated the facts in your recent posts when you contend that Mark has doubled his wife's "salary" without any change in her responsibilities.
The proxy states that Amanda Cola was appointed to her present position on September 11, 2015.
The proxy also states that Mrs. Cola received a salary of $89,250 in 2015 and $90,000 in 2016 - an increase of $750 for serving in her new position for an entire year.
Mrs. Cola also revived a bonus of $10,000 in 2016, so her total cash compensation for 2016 was $100,000 - an increase if $10,750 over what she had received the previous year (8+ months of which were spent in a presumably lesser role).
The balance of Mrs. Cola's compensation package for 2016 consists of a grant on July 22, 2016 of an option to purchase 15,000 shares of stock at an exercise price of $5.92. The option is subject to certain vesting requirements.
The fair value of the options was considered to be $71,394 on the date of the grant. But obviously, given the present price of the stock, no gain or benefit has yet accrued to Mrs. Cola.
Any disdain anyone may have for Sigma and Mr. and Mrs. Cola should not result in conveying inaccurate or misleading facts.
Mrs. Cola's "salary" was NOT doubled without any change in her responsibilities.