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.
Gold is about to turn down.
Sorry...meant beta decay.
Maybe there would be a pop to 80 before then with such high open interest, down after that.
And if you believe that GDX/NUGT bottomed in early August, plan to sell DUST around 35 and buy NUGT again then.
IF gold doesn't bottom Sept26/Oct3, then supposedly gold would then channel until the decline seen in the gold cycle ( Larry E's metric) in Jan.
If that's the/a trend going forward, plan to trade DUST/NUGT back and forth in the channel defined between the highs and lows that were established in Aug (with DUST now having more time decay for a downtrending channel overall).
If you follow Larry E and believe that gold is dropping Sept 26/Oct 3 ( even if the bottom gets pushed out to Jan '14), gold could be reversing soon (head and shoulders) taking GDX/NUGT in the same direction. If that's the trend, sell NUGT and buy DUST.
When it comes to innovation and competition, it takes more than being friends or keeping them afloat to increase shareholder value, imo.
I don't see the situation between AAPL and LQMT as similar to a contents/entertainment royalty business for example with embedded deals in multiple contracts respecting a lot of friendships.
Maybe it's there, but it doesn't explain how shareholder value will be increased for LQMT specifically.
To me (at this point, it could change), lqmt seems more like a charity business for American enterprise, vs. direct shareholder benefit, and what investors can get for it is a tax write off or deduction.
This stock is not doing well.
For "their" benefit, I hope so also.
Tom Steipp - Apple's white knight.
Must be some job trying to force out .... (Cloak and dagger).
If I were them (Steipp) and in light of the Caltech/AAPL development (just mentioned) .... Take the money and run doll; we'll see you on the other side the border, lol (just kidding).
Engineering mistake #1: falling in love with a technology or project and staying too long while the competition passes you up.
it could be now or never.
What might be smart (for them, not necessarily broad shareholders either way); go private and raise enough money to buyout the recent Caltech patent/innovation); and then re-emerge.
A good academic idea or industrial innovation doesn't necessarily mean that it makes it to market or is ever effectively commercialized for broad shareholder benefit.
After all, Steipp might soon be on the market himself. :) lol.
If Steipp was hired to "turn around" LQMT; to dress it up for an acquisition; he maybe doing a good job at it especially if the technology has a limited life (it does). They just need to spin it off and get their piece and that may be what they are doing, and including friends in it.
But this company is not about broad shareholder value.
Ask yourself, with better innovation around the corner, is it really worth a dog pile ; is it worth the investment.
Why not just let these guys have their piece and instead move over to the next great idea and try to influence that.
Instead, maybe check out the company that Caltech has established to commercialize their latest, most recent patent, and try to get it right this time (don't allow them to make the same mistake...with your money).
Maybe LQMT's days are numbered with a nice pop in between. And maybe the current leadership, Steipp, deserves what he will get, financially, especially if their patents and technology now have a limited shelf life, and his job was to position the company (and himself) for a takeover.
Or maybe it's no coincidence that the LQMT website has the name "phoenix" in their UL, and maybe they are "on the cusp" of a large commercialization effort.
But they better hurry up!
They could, but there are probably broader applications.
Big companies can breed complacent well mannered leaders used to a lot of support ($), beauty pageant politics, etc. Small companies need mavericks. When/if LQMT is big, these guys wold probably be a good fit. They need a semi-established market after others have done the hard work. LQMT needed a maverick from day 1; they might have had a con artist instead mixed in with technical skill (the early days). In the meanwhile, innovation continues.
If Caltech can't transition their latest innovation to the market, could be a similar situation.
I was a sucker, too. I bought into the smooth personality on the earlier conference calls. No offense, but I've seen too many of these slick guys in big corps. They always look out for themselves first.
It's definitely been a tease following this company (LQMT). Didn't someone mention that Steipp was separating. Maybe that's a ticket, lol. Wonder who the lucky ..... Is. Lol.
Agree 100%. Applaud these guys for looking out for number 1, themselves.
If Caltech innovation, et al, can start to pass up LQMT innovation, their patents could be worth less.
I think these guys took their poison pill along time ago and got hooked on it, a.k.a. Toxic financing, and like it. The more the better, they just need for time.
I think they are toast (if not now, later) because they like to "take their time".....competition can/will pass them up with those kinds of developments coming out of Caltech (and probably other research groups).
They can buy time. That's about it unless some big organization can het behind them, soon.
It looks like CalTech/Johnson's group is doing some leading research. A question again is timing of commercialization and who does it.
We're puzzled that a large organization/company hasn't jumped at any of this.
LQMT process patents might have their place and they might not!
Who really enjoys watching a stock manipulated for BOD/Exec benefit vs constructive activities for broad shareholder benefit ( for years now ??? )
Doesn't it tire the average investor to watch these guys primarily thinking about themselves (CYA) over anything else.
You can waste your time trying to figure out their next move (with potentially little in it for you), or you can consider focusing on well intended (for broad shareholder benefit) oriented companies with above board leadership and well documented and communicated positive financial results and operating performance.
Cream rises to the top and so can scum.
Why aren't big companies getting behind this?
The new company could be like another Kang operation.
Even though miners for the most part have been following the highs and lows of gold in direction, gold now trades below a diagonal uptrending line whereas miners are bouncing o off of it.
If miners were to go their own way, they might have to diverge from the direction of gold.
Is it possible.
Or maybe AAPL restricts them and the flood gates open Feb 2014.
Based on that article, potential competition for LQMT:
http://www.corporationwiki.com/California/Irvine/glassimetal-technology-inc/102879029.aspx
We couldn't get excited about that but it sounds like some investors have (sheets). Maybe it's just around the corner but no signs of commercialization that we are aware of. The company could easily dispel myths with a press release indicating progress, results of tests, trials, etc., intentions to commercialize, etc.
This says a lot. If the best in the field left years ago and continued their research where it could be funded, and if it's better, and given some implied limitations ($) for lqmt, and/or a past and/or present preference for toxic financing (implied, not sure), then maybe the stars aren't aligned for a clean and competitive commercialization process. Or maybe they have it all wrapped up (to be announced soon).
It would be worth our time when they can demonstrate long term sustainable growth. Hardly anyone thinks they are near it. It sounds like they are just getting started. Maybe it will work out this time from a better thought out plan. But as for communicating about it to give public investors confidence, really weak.
It seems like they could but their business development group to task to generating a channel strategy to mesh with their "ecosystem" to demonstrate how they intend to drive their business long term and issue a press release on it, etc.
Those big company guys know who to do that. What is missing is "investor communications."
They have an issue with second sourcing. They might solve it but they don't sound like they are in any hurry. Apparently it's worth their time and their horizon is also long term. Ask yourself if it meets your investment objectives. One size doesn't necessarily fit all.
Maybe they ran into some problems with phasing out past customers to give AAPL exclusivity.
I'm of the impression that they can produce certain size and types of parts economically (based on one of their website blog posts); maybe it's limited for sheets, etc.
Second sourcing required to make it worth a big companies time to consider it at all sounds like a limitation.
I think they are hiding information for more reasons than just a need to respect a confidentiality agreement. If they have a bird in the hand, it could later be a "I told you so" moment for some, but this isn't how credible public companies operate. Most investors are aware of disclosure requirements, etc., and companies that want to work to that end.
A poster commented on ASHM agenda as sounding "dictator-like".
Maybe they have a "bird n the hand" .... But it sounds like it won't materialize until after another round of financing...sweet for some....probably not so sweet for a long term public common shareholder...TBD.
Way back, LQMT had some activity pertaining to solar cells/panels. That could be interesting (for reflective properties and durability); and satellites, etc.
But what ever happened to those way back announcements? Did they just die on the vine.
Companies with effective investor communications also announce when initiatives are cancelled so that shareholders can assess the impact (can be a positive to cancel a project that doesn't materialize).
But not this company. Or at least not yet.
If anything, they seem paranoid about communicating.
The embedded hologram idea is also captivating (from an aesthetic viewpoint).
2014/2015 could be the year(s).
Jewelry like electronic accessories could get interesting. LM is beautiful enough (can be even more lustrous looking than precious metals) to attract a lot of attention in this area (just a personal view point, I wish they would make something beautiful out of it because it can have special qualities in this area)....at the rate things are going, that probably wouldn't be a priority.
i follow the same guy. if we can establish the range for gdx, we can trade nugt and dust thru Dec. if the low doesn't happen for gold by the 3rd.
Do you know what indicator he is using for the "gold cycle" to time bottoms?
I agree. Initially it sounded good. Maybe they'll actually manufacturer (or support manufacturing for a licensee) sometime in 2H2014 (more than golf clubs...that could work out) but they don't sound very motivated in CCs, etc. Their earlier messages were misleading (it seems to me). Maybe they'll pop on a golf related announcement.
That's how it appears to us also. It's just using peoples money to fund R&D (for years with decreasing revenue that it could have had). What's your interest in the stock?
Our interest in bigger contracts is oriented toward seeing evidence of a long term sustainable growth business model that could justify a sustainable and increasing stock price beyond a pump and dump. But it seems that pumps and dumps are good enough for some investors/traders.
Based on the professional experience of some of the people at LQMT, they seem qualified enough in many areas.
The real issue (it seems to us) is financing (and potentially some limitations of the technology).
There are so many sustainable growth oriented stocks out there or volatile ETFs that offer more regular opportunities to play ups and downs without the long wait and guess work.
The "intrique" of LQMT keeps us coming back to see if anything new develops. It's like a mystery story at this point, or long saga.
Who knows what might pop up next !!! (Or pop down!)
We might be missing something on the manufacturing/second sourcing issue.
We don't have the history on the past with Kang(s) but it sounds like they are still involved and it sounds like for the igolf/mfgr related supplier that manufacturing will be done in China.
Maybe there is (and continues to be??) some related Kang led manufacturing activity/sourcing non-US based that somehow addresses the sourcing issues and maybe LQMT domestic and some kind of front for the longer term strategic angle and maybe LQMT leadership is happy with the current approach to things especially if delayed activity is reason for more rounds of dilution and toxic financing that benefits some, but not necessarily the common public shareholder unless they have an inside track, etc.
Either way, there doesn't seem to be sufficient information on transparency to make an informed decision consistent with a hope or a dream (or maybe there is enough transparency and public common investors just don't want to believe it and like the "mystique" of it all).
I tend to think that the business development guys did their job and due diligence in contacting large companies and ran into the second sourcing issues. It's been referenced at least once or twice in different conference calls in the past.
To me, that seems like a major hangup without a solution for some time unless LQMT is acquired, etc. (potentially).