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.
If the accuracy is questioned, the publisher can be contacted directly, or a more current article that illustrates changes, could be posted. AAPL wouldn't be in a position to modify a design significantly at this point to include a fuel cell, or even 2-3 months ago. If they do release a product soon with a fuel cell, then article wouldn't be reflecting a design that was current when it was written. High tech/consumer electronics/Product Management 101.
It's more recent than what I preciously posted. If it's accurate, AAPL wouldn't have time to make changes pre-annoucement. Consider product development and test cycles where Designs are cast months, even years, in advance ( in contrast to publications which are just words that can be easily changed). Relative to product developments cycles and pre-release schedules, that article would reflect current developments based on the date.
Sorry, meant post February 2014? I was just curious as to how you see things differently for the company (financially) post AAPL extended relationship expiration. Looking forward to your sharing your insights. thanks.
What do you see happening Post 2014? E.g. What would be different then relative to today?
Correction: According to this more recent article ( maybe someone posted this earlier?), the iPhone 5s has a lithium ion (vs. a fuel cell (LM/LQMT) based) battery.
http://www.hngn.com/articles/6050/20130622/iphone-5s-photos-specs-leaked-new-phone-will-higher-battery.htm
This relates to Sept 2013 AAPL announcements that might or might not include LM (LQMT):
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-iphone-5s-announcement-september-10-2013-8
This relates to the battery fuel cell that might include LM.
If LQMT is also working with L.Livermore Labs, there might be a materials research connection to this activity outside of LQMT's activities to AAPL:
A leading fuel cell innovation company out of Boston working with MIT and L.Livermore Labs.
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/industry/industry-directory/l/lilliputian-systems
I'll be eager to hear why you think it might be "lame." Thanks.
I'm hoping they don't announce a fuel cell battery, but when they do, I think it will be huge for aapl.
What do you think about the fuel cell battery?
Combine that with recent insider stock purchases.
A "fuel cell battery" is the PERFECT near term app. I'll regret it if it's announced because I'll miss it. Once the trust is gone, it's hard to go back. But if is announced, and LQMT doesn't derive revenue (which they say they won't from AAPL at least), maybe the stock would come back later, or maybe not! If they did derive revenue from it, I'd be in the stock big because to me, at least, it's a "killer app."
Maybe a fuel cell battery announcement is the catalyst that makes this stock never look back. I really don't know. I just know that I didn't like the dilution on this stock earlier and the potential for it to happen again whether it does or doesn't. LQMT could be hanging on a string and then suddenly it all works out. A fuel cell battery would be a "killer app" (terminology used in the wireless industry for an application that could generate a lot of revenue or attract subscribers to products and and services that can).
Fuel cell batteries could also apply to non-CE markets; a win-win for AAPL and LQMT both. We'll see.
But I'm not a buyer here so don't follow me. A longer life battery makes a lot of sense as a product differentiator. The sooner the better.
I'm rethinking what might come up with AAPL. The battery cell could be in new products soon since it's needed and not related to a full case or aesthetics.
http://www.geek.com/apple/apples-first-liquidmetal-patent-relates-to-fuel-cells-1303743/
If this were the case, they might mot be very motivated to generate new licenses for second sourcing anytime soon. Just a thought/conjecture.
I picked it up on this board. The current license arrangement between LQMT and MTRN has been known about for some time (see LQMT website and mention of LQMT in MTRN's financial report). Some people imply that MTRN could buy LQMT but there isn't anything official that I am aware of. I was thinking that if they did, LQMT might not want to secure new licenses that would support second sourcing required to secure larger business if they were going to be bought out by a company that could full fill that role.
I thought I heard Steipp mention a potential experimental license (a license to allow another company to "experiment" with LM) in the last conference call, around 2H2014. I suppose that the conference call transcript and/or audio recording is on their website. I haven't reviewed it since the live conference call. That's what I thought that he said.
Aside from rivets, hinges, and antennas, some really simple designs sound complex with LM, e.g. Takes about 2 years to go from concept to low production.
Or LM cologne/perfume vessels for astronauts to spice things up a little bit without breakable glass.
New product concept: concentrated alcohol, like red bull, in a small flask made of liquidmetal, so that it can last "forever" without corrosion. It could be passed down through generations, as a "secret sauce." Lol
How about zinfandel?....do you think LQMT could make a flask for it that would last "forever"?
Who do you think the 2h2014 LQMT "experimental" license is with? It doesn't exactly sound promising for iWatch dates if it's with AAPL (or any big contracts, or contracts with big companies).
Maybe they don't want to secure too many licenses if they hope to be acquired by MTRN.
What do you think?
Their quarterly earnings beat by18% also. Great start out the gate. Hope it drops lower than 36. what are the chances.
August is almost up. Where's the new GGCO website. Stock hasn't moved either.
Miners bottomed first. Maybe they are leading again. Equities dropped a little on friday and supposedly might drop a little bit more.
It's friday night LQMTers......go out! Lol
Didn't you comment that he was going through a divorce. That might be a factor.
Anything is possible.
Miners have bottomed (could go lower, but a bottom is in), gold could drop further this month.
Maybe in October (re: open interest on options, re: nugt)
Gold could go down further.
Current gold is down (neg) oil is up (negative for miners) and GDX is flat => no correlation.
...and a drop in miners.
28 is acting like support on GDX, it's friday and not to 30 on DUST. Maybe this marks the pullback?
Maybe end of month window dressing?
Maybe that's too far out for day or swing traders, but it might reflect current sentiment depending on your view of options.