Evidence Based Investments
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.
because the plan of any business is to continue to increase the value of that business by additional assets, sales, intellectual property, and personnel.
with the additive manufacturing industry literally just beginning to head into production this year, with multiple of our products literally just being completed and released within the last 18 months, is it so hard to believe that sales haven't happened yet due to Industry Readiness, and not the company's product.
Is it just happenstance Sigma Labs works with literally every multi-billion-dollar company who is consistently posting about new products and parts they have literally just designed for additive Manufacturing.
Is it just happenstance Sigma Labs just signed a contract with NIST, who is still working on Nationwide processes and regulations for additive Manufacturing.
the investors who began with this company in 2015 are upset with the timeline that they themselves created in their mind and bought in too early.
GE was pushing the technology since 2013-2015, and they still are in the very early stages of additive manufacturing production.
They had to purchase two printer companies for over a billion dollars he's just to get their operations started, and they still haven't made any full-time production profits.
blaming Sigma labs for the industry speed of adoption is absolutely insane.
the only ones doing it are the same ones upset with their original investment, which was their decision to make.
Sigma Labs has the most advanced real time in process quality assurance software in the industry, it has been proven time and time again, and gets better with every software release Sigma Labs completes.
it gets better and better with each and every patent Sigma Labs gets approved, their main process patent already being approved.
Their target market is enormous and untapped and at the very infancy of its capabilities.
even the leaders in this industry are still trying to figure it out the process regulations they will run their additive Manufacturing business.
Even the national regulatory entities in charge of regulating the additive manufacturing process, still do not have every aspect of the process defined at organized.
AM has just begun, calm down and do DD.
Glta SGLB
Actually, it's because the latest offering just put the amount of shares available to over 50% of the company.
This was new data so I made a new conclusion.
Maybe one can purchase an education with all those "shillings"
Do DD lol
I didn't say they are doing it today, I said in Long Run due to the fact that they have over 50% of the company available for purchase.
Reading is hard.
It's ok.
Glta
SGLB
And opinions in every way shape and form.
I've always posted the information and used this information to make valid opinions based on probability.
New information, new outcomes.
Forever changing.
No, I don't remember that. 50% chance you're right lol
If you bet on a coin flip of heads and tails, I bet youre right about 50 percent of the time
Absolutely no clue. This board is full of opinions, not absolute or known facts.
Do DD.
Eom
Yes, these have been in place since 2015 as per the document.
I'm sure it was discussed on this board, but always a good reminder.
I've spoken with him personally. He was unhappy with the fact he didn't hit the goals.
It wasn't his performance that caused it. It was the industry.
I've seen him work. He is a fantastic salesman.
It's in his best interest to do so... Why would he pass up a mechanism that allows him to earn a significant amount of money.
Gave up over 50% via offering. John rice incentive in place to sell co. Once Fisher hits his sales incentives, no one has any tools in place to keep them from wanting to maintain control of the company.
Co may remain as a ticker for awhile, like Arcam, until the purchasing co eventually buys all shares
So they are selling it. Arcam and Concept Laser did A-OK, no worries.
very long relationships with Honeywell, Morris Technologies, Boeing, Siemens, Pratt and Whitney + others.
AM industry continues to heat up... whoever wants to buy a controlling share can do it. Let the bidding begin.
Prospectus vs actual
Cash $1,347,319 3,381,119 Notes payable 100,000 100,000 Stockholders’ equity Preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share; 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding - -(1)Common stock, par value $0.001 per share; 15,000,000 shares authorized, 5,002,185 shares issued and outstanding,
actual; 7,392,185 shares issued and outstanding as adjusted 5,002 7,392(1)Additional paid-in capital 17,525,689 19,557,099 Accumulated deficit (15,509,346) (15,509,346)Total stockholders’ equity 2,021,345 4,055,145 Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $2,588,124 4,621,924
Owner of 293K shares, approximately 5% of company and you think he has no interest in the success of the company?
Lol.
Glta
SGLB
Bruce Madigan is Chief Scientist at Sigma Labs, Inc.
Dr. Madigan was previously employed as a Professor by National Institute of Standards & Technology.
He received his undergraduate degree from The Ohio State University, a graduate degree from The Ohio State University and a doctorate degree from Colorado School of Mines.
Anything worth mentioning?
Same Alma mater as Mark Cola?
Previous experience with NIST?
Highly advanced Doctorate University...
Check x4
Glta
SGLB
Also interesting to note, after the last offering, all shares issued and outstanding total to 7. 3 million out of 15 million authorized.
This leaves the company with just over 50% control.
Likelihood and probability of another dilution in the near-term, unlikely.
The entire reasoning of the last increase in authorized shares was so that the company could control more than 50%.
They have now issued just about as many shares as they can in order to maintain this level of control.
The company has effectively raised the money needed to continue operations for the foreseeable future.
Glta
SGLB.
Did no one seriously find this in the new America Makes and ANSI roadmap..
Process Control
2.2.2.2 Digital Format and Digital System Control.
Leverage NIST research and work with SDOs to
ensure that AM process control standards include
digital format and digital system control.
Update: The ISO/TC 261/ASTM F42 JG 56 standard in development addresses digital data configuration
control.
Medium Green
NIST,
ISO/ASTM JG
56, SAE, IEEE-
ISTO PWG
No, I've maintained a position with the company for a majority of the time, and have steadily increased Sigma as part of my portfolio over time.
I would have to look up the exact definition, but I'm fairly certain swing trading is over a short period of time, such as a week or two, and usually resolves into completely selling all shares owned upon exit.
I am not a "swing trader". I am an investor. I focus on small cap companies with long term growth, and only take profits when the opportunity presents itself.
I believe swing traders are more focused on charts and such instead of the actual company, industry, and assets involved.
I could be wrong, but I've never considered myself a swing trader...I don't think I am, by definition.
I would say the only time that that actually occurred was all the way back in 2013 2014 with the GE connection.
I think that those in charge of Sigma Labs at the time had proper intentions however as we saw through the America makes program, GE was not very favorful in their description of the software and also its Mark Cola stated, they do not have the most recent version of the software.
They then filed a patent application for acoustic in-process quality monitoring the day following Sigma Labs application, which included acoustic, photographic, IR eularian and lagrangian sensors.
It was clear that GE had either gone on separately and created their own in the process quality monitoring Technologies that are dangerously similar to Sigma Labs, except they are limited specifically to acoustic.
In many studies, it shows that acoustic alone is not as complete as acoustic with a photographic component, usually IR.
still, sigma labs at least came out of it with the better patent, soon to be patentS including a closed loop solution using the same technology.
It appears GE will be stuck with a limited acoustic version.
I absolutely do not think that anyone involved was Sigma Labs could have foreseen these events when they were trying to conduct business with another company.
It's bad business, and may cripple GE if they are unable to replicate results that Sigma Labs technology is capable of, however with infinite resources I'm sure they are capable of finding a way, but it will cost them millions in R&D and time, if it hasn't already... probably well over..
Especially with Sigma Labs working directly with NIST in the US and LZN in Germany, the language of the standards may greatly benefit Sigma Labs.
The only other blunder I can think of off the top of my head was the Arete deal, but that again turned out to be the CEO of Arete lying about their funding and printing capabilities.
Again, not really Sigma's fault as they were trying to act in good faith of the other company and were deceived.
If they had the resources to do extensive DD it could have been avoided, but for a startup with only a handful of employees and a small amount of cash, its not surprising.
As the early adopter program pricing ends and production contracts become a reality, all the "dot" connecting will be over.
It is more than a simple a simple dot when a company has contracts in hand with
Pratt and Whitney
Honeywell
Aerojet Rocketdyne
Woodward
Siemens
Trumpf
Additive Industries
LZN
NIST
EWI
USAF
All of these companies/government entities have very delicate IP as well as prestigious names. They wouldn't go running around signing random contract with some no-name startup without good reason.
It's not just happenstance or coincidence.
It's the industry leading in-process quality assurance software.
Glta
SGLB
Center of Excellence is a hot topic name...
EWI has one, Pratt and Whitney has one. Both use Sigma Labs software....
http://additivemanufacturing.com/2018/03/19/astm-international-selects-ewi-and-auburn-university-nasa-for-new-additive-manufacturing-center-of-excellence/
was a major topic brought up at the recent Additive Manufacturing Consortium held by Edison Welding Institute.
I'm not able to access my notes at the moment but will get back once I can
Connecticut-based United Technologies Corporation (UTC) has announced a number of large investments into its research arm, UTRC, including plans for a $75 million ‘Additive Manufacturing Center of Excellence.’
Implementing additive in aerospace
Pratt & Whitney is already very familiar with the additive manufacturing process. As the company explains it has 3D printed over 100,000 prototype parts over the years, and has used 3D printing to develop the PurePower aircraft engine which rivals GE’s LEAP. Expanding its capabilities, Pratt & Whitney recently entered into a partnership with additive manufacturing software providers Sigma Labs
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/utc-announces-75-million-additive-manufacturing-center-excellence-115071/
http://www.the-mtc.org/our-technologies/metrology-ndt
If I were to have held a position in Sigma Labs for 4 years and just watch the decline then yes I would be an idiot.
This company and the stock have given a plethora of opportunities for anyone to recuperate any losses, unless held for an extraordinary amount of time, such as four years, without making any trades.
The only possible way that someone would have fallen into that situation, is if they were to invest all the money that they had available, in one purchase.
That's bad investing.
If that's what anyone had done with any company you are more than likely to have lost money.. You never go all in, in one purchase, especially with a startup company or any company for that matter.
Warren Buffett has some great literature on a commonly used technique purchasing small percentages of your total portfolio at a time, so you can properly valuate a company as you invest.
If the stock goes up, and makes sense to sell, by becoming overvalued, you sell. You wait until the price falls back to normal levels and you buy back in.
If the price depreciates after you purchase your initial small percentage of your portfolio, and you have done your due diligence and you believe in the company, you purchase for an average down in small percentage increments.
As long as the company has just about anything in the pipeline, as Sigma Labs historically has, eventually, you will be presented the opportunity to sell for a profit and reenter at a lower price.
Even if you bought high in 2014, as even I did (after the fall after that crazy run, unfortunately, the company and the industry, wasn't on my radar before the run) there were plenty of opportunities to average down and sell on the news. I previously invested in solar technology when it made a great run between 2005-2015 before it crashed and settled down around that time. Also power storage which had a similar time frame.
Biotechnology is interesting but very speculative and requires hundreds of millions in research and development for any one medicine/vaccine/etc. I dabbled in that industry for a few years but each individual company requires extensive research by the investor, and you also need to understand the approval process required by the FDA, and also understanding the scientific evidence requires an extensive background in the medical and science fields
Luckily, I happened to have access to a scientific research consultant who could explain different studies that I didn't have the educational background in.
Which bring me back to my point that Sigma Labs has the scientific evidence to back all of their software and Technology. That gives them a great Advantage when we have all these R&D contracts and hand that are now turning to production contracts. If we didn't have that scientific backing to prove the validity of our software, then this would still be a speculative play. However Sigma Labs has continued to secure intellectual property and advance their software, to surpass the industry's competition.
In 2014 yes all those connections were much more so "dots" than they are today, as now we currently hold multiple production contracts with multiple multi-billion-dollar additive manufacturing operations.
Now it's not just connecting who we might be working with, it's connecting who we currently have contracts with with who they do business with.
When you have a contract with a company like Woodward, you can easily see that they additively manufacture parts for some of the biggest names in the industry
Similar to a contract with Pratt and Whitney who is one of the leaders in auxiliary power unit production, including a contract with Honeywell who also is a leader of auxiliary power unit production, and between those two companies both supply Airbus and Boeing who just signed a collaboration to produce auxiliary power units together.
So, to summarize, my due diligence is based on a combination of scientific data, company background, assets, market penetration, taget market size, current contracts in hand, and proven business model.
I saw potential in Sigma in 2014 and believed they had a very bright future whether they got bought out when they were overvalued and it made sense to sell the company, or after developing the software and company and growing it organically.
I still maintain that sentiment, as they decided to grow the company organically, it has been a long, exciting process.
Plenty of opportunities for either side to make a lot of money every year.
Never go all in on any company especially a startup.
Glta
SGLB.
Ok, that accounts for 500k shares out of the 27 million shares traded...who else watched it lol
Lmao..that's funny
Glta
SGLB
You are aware that anyone can buy and sell shares as they please so if I were to hold my position in 2014 then yes it would have been a terrible decision and a terrible investment, but luckily I'm not an idiot and was able to sell for a profit on a bounce and reenter at a lower price.
The stock historically has fluctuated over 100% at any given time in a year in both directions.
The low float has allowed for easy recovery no matter what...
It would pretty pretty difficult to hold a stock for 4 years never making any profit and just watching a decline. That would be Dreadful, absolutely painful.
I can't imagine anyone even beginning to believe that was an option.
That's just insanity.
And my post clearly states how it was speculative about what they were doing with GE.
I clearly stated that the quickest Road for them to profitability would be to sell out while their valuation was extraordinarily high, instead of taking the long road to develop the software on their own and add personnel.
All you're doing is proving my point.
That post clearly says the easiest way for them at that time was just to sell out because their valuation was well above their assets.
And I also clearly stated that if they go the long road it will take a lot of time and a lot of money which it has.
Knowing this, at the time, I did not have any substantial position with the company
I obviously knew that back in 2014 and wasn't going to heavily invest in a company that was years away from developing a legitimate product and millions of dollars in R&D activity yet to spend.
So, thanks for doing your due diligence and discovering that I've been right since 2014
Glta
SGLB
So that would be saying, that a Claytrader video that was posted at the end of the day on May 30th after the run took place,
With a whopping 98 views on YouTube, Was responsible for 27.5 million shares traded,
that just so happened to occur the day that Sigma Labs announce a closed-loop solution for additive Manufacturing.
That's an extraordinary conclusion to jump to....
Come on, that's not even trying anymore. I guess as the evidence continues to stack against, it's becoming harder but
got to come with something better than that
Sheesh.
Glta SGLB
You act like he's just simply giving himself the shares. All of it has to be approved by the board of directors. If it didn't make sense to compensate him in the way that they are doing, it would never be approved.
No CEO has the power to just grant themselves shares whenever they please. It was predetermined and voted on by the board that this compensation was a fair price for his services.
They know what is in the pipeline and what is going on behind the scenes that Sigma Labs as a public company cannot reveal to the public.
John Rice has already secured millions of dollars through private Investments for the company and has been continuously taking them out of a terrible cash situation and keeping the company afloat in the transition from an R&D company to commercialized production software company.
I haven't seen an issue with any of his strategic moves, in fact, if anything, he has positively affected the company, by freeing up Mark Cola and giving him the opportunity to travel to Europe, Germany, England, in order to hold the two-day seminar for multiple customers and explain our technology to there machine operators and Engineers on the ground floor.
John Rice has expanded are operations overseas by hiring multiple personnel in Germany and England.
And also by freeing up Mark, Sigma Labs has been able to further develop their software capabilities including but not limited to the most recent announcement of beta testing a closed-loop solution.
By far the most advanced in the industry as it is the first to Market.
John knows the company and the industry very well and has done a tremendous job at advancing the company by securing intellectual property as well as hiring key personnel, securing millions of dollars through private investors, and keeping the company afloat while the early adopter program ends, and real production contracts begin to roll in.
There is still no single company in the industry printing critical Aerospace parts without using CT scanning for every individual part.
Once companies become comfortable trusting in and in process quality monitoring software, they will see that they do not need to CT scan every part because they have the data from the in process inspection that proves the validity that their print was compliant with design intent (see Honeywell PDFs, articles).
Especially with a closed-loop solution, CT scanning and post processing will eventually gradually diminish until they are no longer needed at all.
Yes, this will take time, but, as with all of our Technologies, Sigma Labs is the first to market with the most advanced solution.
Glta
SGLB
Only the terrible investors who bought it in 2013-2014 when stock was dramatically overpriced because they didn't know how to properly valuate a company, and purchased a startup technology company's stock when it had a market cap of over a hundred million with approximately $5 Million or less in assets
So basically they paid a 20X premium on a start-up without a commercialized product, that was still in need of a couple years of testing and evaluation before even releasing their first commercially available version of IPQA.
This was completely their fault as no one forced them to purchase the stock.
It was a lack of due diligence (DD), on their part, because they did not properly investigate the company as well as the technology and the industry.
At the time, the industry was nowhere near production capabilities.
AM printers were truly a black box, many companies had absolutely no control over what was being printed out of those machines. Many of the machines were known to be extremely variable from print to print.
Many machines we're still under development and had very limited capabilities especially as far as sensors and process parameters go.
It wasn't until very recently within the last couple years that the entire industry including oem's had come to the realization that their printers needed to be much more intricate, they needed to collect data from each part during the build, and they needed to ensure that the machine was doing as it was told, as when they printed multiple Parts after doing CT scanning they saw that no two parts were the same.
This happened just very recently in the industry.
We're talking about the time span of in some cases less than a year to approximately a couple years that these printers with a higher technological capability where developed.
So for those who jumped into the additive manufacturing industry, as far as investing and buying stock goes, for a majority of investors, industrywide, most 3D printer companies have not had great success in that time span.
Yes as with every industry there are a couple exceptions. But if you look at even some of the major players in the industry over the last five years, there stock has not been performing very well.
GE Has Fallen to extreme lows
Materialize has underperformed for years just until 2017 they rebounded.
3D systems has fallen dramatically since 2013.
Nano dimension has fallen dramatically since going public.
Stratasys has fallen dramatically since 2013.
So to sit here and blame Sigma Labs individually as if it is an industry-wide problem is absolutely nonsensical.
Everyone thought that additive manufacturing was going to be the biggest Industrial Revolution ever seen in our generation.
They may be right, but the timing and the hype we're absolutely incorrect.
As we've seen, everyone within the industry has had to do an extraordinary amount of research and development to create a viable product that is capable of mass production purposes.
This is where additive manufacturing is an economically viable solution.
Without many of the technologies that were very recently developed within the past couple years around 2016 to present day, mass production of additive manufactured Parts would not be possible.
Still, no one has been able to mass produce any critical part without extensive CT scanning of every individual part.
This is not a viable business model and going forward, the industry including the entities who are responsible for creating the standards for the industry, have identified that in-situ inspection is absolutely necessary to ensure the part was printed correctly.
It just so happens that Sigma Labs, has the most advanced in process Quality Assurance Technology in the industry.
When the industry starts mass production of critical Parts, they will need a technology like Sigma labs IPQA.
Considering we have contracts in hand with basically every major additive Manufacturing Company in the United States, including multiple years of ongoing contracts with many of them, it is a very strong signifier that our software works, and that once these companies begin mass production of critical parts, they will need additional units of our software, without early adopter program pricing discounts.
Do DD
Glta
SGLB
Pratt and Whitney plans on doubling it's supplier spending from $750 Million to 1.5 Billion in Connecticut alone over the next few years.
Just another global enterprise who happens to have a commercial agreement with Sigma Labs.
No big deal.
https://www-courant-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/www.courant.com/business/hc-biz-f35-cockpit-demonstration-20180604-story,amp.html
Do DD.
Glta
SGLB
Right, because an ongoing relationship with multiple multi-billion-dollar companies is a bad thing.
Especially when that relationship involves DARPA,
ICME Standards
NIST - industry-wide standards.
NASA and ARIES programs
Aerojet Rocketdyne
USAF
Lol
Swing and a miss.
Do DD
Glta
SGLB
Since it's obvious neither of you have been invited to one of these investor events, what is simply done, is the event coordinator, separates all the companies into their individual industry, so out of this immensely long list you actually have at least 10 different Industries to separate each company into.
I didn't waste my time counting each individual company but it looks as if there's probably over a hundred in that list let's round it to a nice 150.
Divided by 10 different specific industries that they represent, puts 15 companies into each industry.
That makes these investor events much more manageable to watch 15 presentations over the course of the day, instead of pretending that all of these companies are presenting on one stage, to water down what actually goes on.
Most of the time, the attendees at these type of events, are representing Institutional Investors, or private investors, such as the last funding that Sigma Labs received.
Do you think these investors randomly call up Sigma labs and ask if they can invest a million dollars?
No. It's events like these that are able to put us in contact with people actively looking for investment opportunities.
Do DD
Glta
SGLB
We actually work with all of them, have developed software with them, and most recently signed production contracts with multiple of them.
So, once those companies start full production runs, and need multiple units, with a standardized process as LZN and NIST (who Sigma Labs both work with) are currently creating, the revenues for sigma labs will begin to be recognized.
Since it was necessary for Sigma labs to get their foot in the door with all of these multibillion-dollar corporations, by giving discounted early adopter program pricing, these revenues for greatly hindered, as the company is we're still going through research and development processes in order to create a viable business model using AM.
So, once the companies that were once early adopter customers begin production, as many of them are scheduled to during this year thru 2020, Sigma Labs will see research and development money turn into production money.
Companies are more willing to spend much more money on production rather than research and development.
Sigma Labs software was specifically designed for the production setting since the inception of the company.
The immediate need for in-situ inspection for LRIP was the low hanging fruit in the early 2000s into just a few years ago.
Now that mass production is becoming a reality, the need for a strong Industrial internet-of-things software solution, for multiple machines over a web-based network, is necessary.
It just so happens that Sigma Labs is the first to Market with an In-process quality assurance system capable of industrial internet-of-things capabilities, while verifying that material characteristics are met in every part over multiple builds over multiple machines.
Do DD.
Glta.
SGLB
Sigma Labs has been working with Honeywell, including specifically on Auxiliary Power Units (APUs) and other Aerospace components while continuing their work in the DARPA program, advancing their Contour software, and working on developing ICME standards.
Honeywell's previous customers while Sigma Labs was working with them, included, but we're not limited to, Boeing and Airbus (Safran), US government, foreign governments, etc.,
And now, it just so happens Boeing and Safran sign a collaboration to produce APUs together.
LZN, who happens to work with Sigma Labs, also works directly with Airbus (Safran).
So pick your choice of our next customer for production purposes....
Honeywell
Airbus (Safran)
LZN
*UTC Pratt and Whitney also a major supplier of APUs.
Woodward supplies Airbus and Boeing
Morf3d suppies Boeing
Spartacus3d is based in France where Safran HQ is.
https://www.safran-power-units.com/media/safran-obtains-first-certification-3d-printed-gas-turbine-engine-major-part-20170619
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://aerospace.honeywell.com/en/blogs/2015/october/how-a-3d-printer-can-identify-its-own-mistakes&ved=2ahUKEwinwbf_z73bAhUIeKwKHdpcBc4QFjADegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw2kJ29aSP3CFF8xskG1NNLJ
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.sigmalabsinc.com/sites/default/files/2018-04/RAPID%25202015%2520Non-Destructive%2520Evaluation%2520Techniques%2520for%2520Additive%2520Manufacturing_0.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwinwbf_z73bAhUIeKwKHdpcBc4QFjAGegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0CyjXBSlVXuHMABy1uIBd0
https://www.safran-group.com/media/boeing-safran-agree-design-build-and-service-auxiliary-power-units-20180604
https://www.nist.gov/video/overview-measurement-science-additive-manufacturing-msam-program
Glta
SGLB
We are presently authorized to issue 10,000,000 shares of $0.001 par value preferred stock, of which 1,610,000 shares have been designated “Series A Preferred Stock” and 1,000 shares have been designated “Series B Convertible Preferred Stock,” or “Series B Preferred Stock.” As of May 30, 2018, we had 500 shares of Series B Preferred Stock issued and outstanding, which are convertible into 500,000 shares of common stock.
Exactly what I tried to explain days ago, this S3 is similar to the previous one that was never fully used if at all (can't remember at the moment and don't feel like researching right now).
But we previously has an S3 with similar language in regards to the $75M valuation.
And we never (to my recollection) were able to put it in effect bc we stayed below 75M.
With EAPs ending, and having a fully commercialized product available, as well as beta closed loop solution, I suspect, as you do, real production contracts coming.
Our first EAP Customer was Spartacus3d, who works with Pratt and Whitney, Airbus, Dassault Systemes, Safran, and many others...so take your pick :)
I believe Honeywell was the first to pick up once, at the time, Deform was released and included in the program.
Also the OEM program also gave incentivized pricing in 2017, which will also end this year.
"Yet, I would say, that our most important accomplishment as a company is that we have succeeded in converting our company culture from R&D technology development into a Technology Commercialization Enterprise." - John Rice.
Who will only be interim CEO for one year as of July 2018.
In the grand scheme of things, both John and Mark have made tremendous strides for the company in that very short time.
Signed a plethora of new contracts, Development of multiple softwares, including the first in the market closed loop solution for AM, and raised millions in private offerings.
Great work laying the foundation to build from.
2018 and beyond, we will begin to see the value of this companies technologies really start to shine.
Glta
SGLB
It is interesting to note that over the past few years even still to this day, such as the recent Lockheed Martin deal to invest in a Canadian powder supplier, that even the largest companies involved in the additive manufacturing industry are still investing in the physical components of the process.
We've seen GE acquire to printer OEM again in order to ensure they have the proper physical components for additive Manufacturing.
Money powder suppliers are in similar situations as the canadian-based one mentioned above, that are either being bought out or invested in heavily by oems, and users, or companies like Alcoa, who split their company into two, one of which is involved heavily in producing powder.
So as of now, the majority of action going on within the additive manufacturing industry has all been based on the physical components of the process including building factories, acquiring printers, acquiring powder.
So logically, the next step would be to ensure the software side of things.
Creating large Industrial internet-of-things hardware and software set-ups to create protected servers to ensure that all of those shiny brand new printers can communicate and run efficiently 24/7.
We've seen software companies for the most part announce their technology but really have not grown all that much especially in the AM sector such as Siemens, Materialize, GE, Stratasys and others.
As their technology has improved and shown what it can do, it has not been in the headlines that they are making any sort of record sales with their software.
In fact those listed above for the most part their stocks have been not doing so great lately, at least do in some part to the underperforming, delayed AM sector.
The only technology companies who have "succeeded" were privately held companies that had a very small number of investors who could afford to sell out like 3DSim.
So, as the industry heads towards mass production which is desperately in need of software solutions from beginning to end, these companies that have been purchasing up the hardware side of things will sure to be first to understand they also need to secure the software side of things.
Food for thought
Glta
SGLB
Industry activity is heating up immensely this summer which is pretty unusual
America makes TRX, multiple industry events thru AMUG, AMC, GE and LPW tours of their facility.
EOS North America facility event
Materialise hosting a conference next week.
DARPA ICME this quarter.
Honeywell continuation?
Closed Loop beta testers?
EAP ending, production contracts to begin
...who will be first?
Siemens, Pratt and Whitney, Solar turbines, Woodward?
All potential multi-million dollar deals.
The great US of A is not having another European summer.
Looks like a lot of activity will be happening this summer.
Glta
SGLB
Also incorrect. It's very clear that John rice has been running the ship as Mark has not made nearly as many strategic business moves that John Rice has.
Mark has been recruiting the highest level of software engineers and Developers.
The immediate decision to change from an R&D company to a software company had to be made by someone who understands both the industry and the company. John Rice knew it was time to stop wasting personnel and their very limited time on R&D projects that would contractually lock up their personnel and assets.
When a company for instance signs a R&D project with a Department of Defense entity, the DoD specifically requires the amount of time and when they want to use said company's assets, personnel, and otherwise.
The company is contractually obligated to follow the DoD entity's demands, as they have government interests. I know this because I've been a part of them.
So, John Rice decided that we should move to the private sector as much as possible by commercializing our software and selling to multiple entities instead of being constricted to one or two R&D projects that don't pay nearly as much.
The groundwork laid with the early adopter program with some of the largest additive manufacturing companies in the world may cause some short-term pain, but in the long term they will be purchasing multi-unit production contracts for print rite 3D and other QaaS or SaaS services.
Does the last 2 years of software development, including the recent announcement of a beta closed loop solution mean nothing?
Our main software is ready for production.
The closed loop is still referred to as the "holy grail" and "future of Additive manufacturing" and we currently have a beta version. First in the industry.
Idk what more one could want really
The IR and photodiodes currently being used are both photographic sensors, not acoustic.
And yes the patents state that the software can be used with multiple types of sensors including photographic IR and photodiodes.
Maybe read this again as it clearly states that the current version of PR 3D inspect specifically can be used for mass production purposes.
A web-based industrial internet-of-things solution to the in process quality assurance Gap identified by the industry including but not limited to the FAA, and NIST, who we currently have a collaboration contract with.
How is a commercialized software ready for production sales once the early adopter programs and in the upcoming months not a "developed" product?
Armed with Sigma Labs’ new PrintRite3D INSPECT® Version 3.0.2 software, process engineers will now be able to produce an alloy-specific process map generated using Sigma Labs’ in-process TED™ metric, an industry first. This industry first approach to in-process monitoring is designed to enable rapid process qualification, which Sigma Labs believes will result in increased production yields and faster product to market times.
The Company believes that its IPQA®-based process map, combined with customer-specific post-process quality metric data will become a unique and irreplaceable tool for process engineers looking to rapidly and cost effectively establish operating process windows within the larger process map. The new version of PrintRite3D INSPECT® also provides a complete production-level package of statistical process control (SPC) software apps, which digitally supports serial production quality monitoring at a build, part, layer or scan level, thereby ensuring continuous operation within the qualified processing window.
So what do you consider our production contracts with Pratt & Whitney, Siemens, aerojet Rocketdyne, Woodward, and on going DARPA project that we've made it through all three phases of development with Honeywell (the third phase being commercialization) who's lead Engineer has written multiple papers specifically writing the importance of in-process quality assurance and our specific technogies?
What do you consider our contract with the National Institute of Standards of Technologies?
I don't know if you know but they are in charge of writing the standards for the additive manufacturing process from conception to completion of any part.
What do you consider our contract with LZN who are specifically looking at our technology for the standardization of mass production of additive manufactured parts?
The early adopter program was a necessary step in order to get our software to the largest additive manufacturing companies in the industry.
We even just very recently had to give them a two-day seminar to explain the importance of our software and also what it provides to them.
This shows our software is extremely Advanced and that even current-day engineer's and those operating the machines do not fully understand the complexity of our software.
(Read this next part slowly...maybe even read it twice and use a dictionary if necessary.)
Our software is able to mine specific data in real time, to show that the process parameters were followed in order to prove direct correlation that the material characteristics of the printed part were welded properly, under the right conditions in every aspect of the build, in order to show with a very high level of certainty (95-100%) that the part was printed correctly, simultaneously over multiple machines, printing multiple parts over the industrial internet.
The operator knows within 8 seconds if a non-nominal weld was made on any one individual layer of any one individual part.
Soon, the closed loop solution will even eliminate the need to alert the operator, and have the machine correct it's own error.
This data from correct builds that match the exact material characteristics that are needed for the designed part and its application is been stored on our Analytics system.
If Sigma Labs were to either hire employees whose expertise is designing parts, or merge/become acquired with a company who specifically already has a engineering staff or design and simulation software such as Siemens, Autodesk, Materialize, ANSYS, or many others, we would then have potentially within a very short period of time, tens, to hundreds, to thousands, of patented part designs, that we can then sell to end users as IP.
Imagine if we were able to design ammunition for the Department of Defense and print the ammunition, verify the validity of each unit, and sell it over our software platform , sending it directly to a naval ship, so they can print Hi-Tech ammunition, and loaded into their fighter jets.
What are the chances that we already have patented ammunition designs while simultaneously working with the DoD who is specifically looking into creating an additive manufacturing Network so that they can securely send intellectual property to an offshore additive manufacturing machine and print whatever they want.
Food for thought.
Glta
SGLB