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.
This isn't exactly like handing out candy corn at halloween. To be effective, technical support and training over an extended period of time is going to be essential. No one is going to sign up after a two week trial (more like many months of testing). Where is the staffing and funds going to come from for this effort. If they simply dole out the software they are not going to achieve anything.
"By September 1, 2017, the Company strategy led to a policy requiring 100% sales and marketing focus on prospective customers who are already producing AM metal parts in production runs", John makes this statement then turns around and all his prospective new hires will be technical folks. SGLB seems to be most comfortable in the R&D mode...writing white papers, appearing at conferences, etc. None of which has led to meaningful sales.
" For me it's simple...The CEO can't be trusted regardless of his past success." Exactly....and that is why I sold my entire position after the "Friday night debacle". I still made a profit, and even more on the third of a position I sold in the 5's. I'll continue to watch and if it appears that he is able to really turn this thing around I'll bu=y back in.
"And this was from 2014. We've advanced exponentially since then.
PR3D IPQA commercially available and ready for production."
But...but....but....just a month ago you were claiming that this was beta software back then and not commercially available. Which is it? Oh yeah, I remember now the software was being "marketed" to customers but that did not mean it was commercially available.
Sure. Let's see what happens.
"if they would have utilized in process quality assurance to make sure the parts were printed to specifications" I'll ask one more time....Do you believe RR is uninformed? Do you think they were not aware of SGLB's in-process solution? Do you believe you are better informed than the RR engineers who did not choose to utilize the SGLB software? Why is it that you can't accept that maybe....just maybe...Printrite is considered as a potential solution for in-process quality assurance and rejected. Why? I don't have the faintest idea, but it seems blatently obvious at this point that it does not meet the needs required.
"Hmm Rolls Royce going to spend $643 Million on inspection," So RR would spend hundreds of millions of dollars on inspections yet won't purchase copies of Printrite 3d for a few hundred thousand dollars. What does that tell you about the marketability of SGBD's software solutions? Is RR stupid? Are they ignorant of Printrite's capabilities? Do they like to spend money they don't have to? The answer to all those questions is NO. The software simply does not currently meet industry needs. Why, I have no idea, but the evidence simply could not be clearer.
He likely doesn't feel quite so "all knowing" smug at the moment.
Ted.Thank you.
No it won't. Besides, as I read it, the preferred needs to be converted before the holders start accruing the dividend. The wording is a bit funky on this so I certainly stand to be corrected. My guess is that if the preferred is all converted the share price will take a hit but won't drop below a dollar for the reasons cited by RR.
They are going to exercise at least some of them right away. Why wouldn't they? It gives them flexibility to sell if they wish to. Do you think the share price is going to immediately fall below $1.10? I suppose it might, but I doubt it.
A couple more things to consider Kanya.
Note that the funds are to be used primarily for new technical employees to enhance the software. None of the funds are going to bolster the sales efforts (which were supposedly the new emphasis). This signals to me that the software still does not fully meet industry needs and requires enhancements before it can be profitably marketed.
The real interest rate on the preferred shares is not 10% annually but 11.4% (they only received $877,500 from the offering not $1,000,000).
Finally preferred holders apparently are unrestricted in terms of sales. There is a real risk that the new shareholders will start dribbling out shares that they can sell for $1.25-$1.50 per share and pocket a quick secure profit. They have the 750,000 $1.47 warrants available to them in the event SGLB makes a dramatic turnaround so why not lock in quick profits so long as you don't sell enough to depress the price. I believe this is a real possibility.
As I understand the deal SGLB receives $1,000,000 initially from the offering. The preferred holders have the right to convert their preferred shares into one million ordinary shares of stock. In addition they receive warrants to purchase an additional 750,000 shares of stock at $1.47 a share. Finally they will be paid a cumuilative dividend of 10% per share for each share of preferred converted to the common for a period of two years. The underwriters receive a fee of $80,000 plus expenses of $42,500 for their part. In addition they receive warrants for 80,000 shares of common stock at $1.47 cents a share.
Perhaps there was a time restriction restriction on the buyers of the preferred as to how long they were required to hold the converted common shares before selling them. If so, I did not see it.
So in summary, as I see it SGLB received a net of $877,500 ($1,000,000- $80,000- $42,500). They are obligated to pay $100,000 in dividends each year for the next two years assuming the preferred purchasers hold onto their shares. They have an initial dilution of one million shares and potential additional dilution of another 830,000 shares should all the warrants be exercised.
In the event that there actually was no time restriction placed on the preferred holders for selling their shares they could very well decide that they want a quick return on their investment and start liquidating some of their shares early which would put tremendous price pressure on the shares.
I'm delighted you think this is a good deal for the company and shareholders. I guess you can call me a naysayer but I think it reeks of desperation.
Bullshit!! The "tough choice" would have been to be upfront with why you believed the ATM was necessary before you took it on. Level with shareholders in advance and let them make the decision on whether this is a good move or not. Instead you chose to announce this move on a Friday night after hours. That's not balanced, that's deceitful, and it will be a long time before I believe what comes out of your mouth again. You give great presentations, but you have the morals of a snake.
The Fat Lady is yet to sing!!
I'm out. 96,000 shares dumped this AM. Really disappointed in Brent Willis. This is going to have to get close to a buck before I'll even look at it again.
Assuming Brent intended the availability of these shares to fund an additional acquisition, his timing could not have been worse. If this were actually the strategy it's hard for me to believe that Brent, with his communication skills, would not have justified this well in advance to shareholders and prepared the market for what was to come. The fact that he made this move after hours on a Friday evening destroys most of the trust that I had in his integrity. Even if he doesn't issue a single share in the near term he has done significant damage to the share price and has destroyed an awful lot of goodwill with the existing base. He's got a lot of making up to do, I just hope he can pull it off.
A couple of months back you were hoping for an 80 million gross year in 2018 (NBEV had forecast 90 million). At the Roth they apparently said that they were on a 66 million dollar run rate. Over the past several weeks/months a number of significant new distribution announcements have been made that would seem to add to the gross for this year. The stock price is in free-fall and while I still have significant profits here I don't want to sit around and watch it completely self-implode. What are your thoughts now? When do you think we'll get a look at what realistic expectaions for this year are going to be? Appreciate your thoughts. Thanks.
Gee Mr. DD. The SEC requires companies to report major events which shareholders should know about. The SEC simply provided a list of examples that they considered major events. I guess you don't consider the results of a vote to expand the number of authorized shares as a major event. I believe you might be in the minority of shareholders who would agree with you.
Compliance Reporting. The following is what the SEC says about reporting an event or occurrence via an 8K. I'm somewhat surprised that SGLB did not consider shareholder approval to increase the number of authorized shares as a significant event.
Companies file this report with the SEC to announce major or extraordinary events that shareholders should know about, including entry into material agreements; mergers and acquisitions; change in control; changes in auditors; the issuance of unregistered securities; amendments in company articles or bylaws; company name changes; issues with reliance on previously issued financial statements; changes in officer or directors; bankruptcy proceedings; change in shell status regulation F-D disclosures and voluntary disclosures (voluntary disclosures have no filing deadline).
"our work with all these companies has achieved nothing" Same old story, month after month, and now year after year. It's always going to turn around in the next six months. Your pitch becomes less and less creditable as time goes on.,
I'll continue to deny the B.S. you spread . Your efforts to continuously paint a rosy picture are not going to do much good unless you can conjure up some serious earnings news very very soon.
Mark never acknowledged this was (likely still is) beta level software until well after he announced the releases and proclaimed that he was "actively marketing the software" to customers. It was only after he realized how buggy it actually was in end-users working environments thet he started referring to it as "beta". After watching him in action over the years I believe very little that comes out of his mouth
Duh!!
Ha Ha. Certainly will be fun to see who has the last laugh here.
No. Called the company and inquired.
Additional shares were approved.
Go back and retake Business 101. You just can't stand to be corrected, even when blatantly wrong. Get over it.
"We are currently and actively marketing that software to potential customers" What part of Mark's statement in Q-3 2014 is it that you don't understand? They were clearly deceptive early on that this was releaseable software, when in fact it remained in test stage (perhaps even to this day).
Absolutely false!!
From the Q-3 2014 Conference call re Mark Cola: "We've rolled out and launched our initial software offering under our moniker of PrintRite3D INSPECT. This is the quality assurance software that is the first of a series of software roll-outs that we anticipate, and it will be addressing the first of three attributes that are sort of at the moment hindering the growth of the 3D metal market. And so that product is geared towards basically allowing the end user to assure the metallurgical quality of his deposits.
And so with that we are quite pleased with the software. We are currently and actively marketing that software to potential customers. We are responding to requests for quotes and we anticipate the continued interest to accelerate.
Do you see anything about being beta test software here. You don't market software to end customers that is beta, unless of course you are Mark Cola. This was represented as a fininshed tested product, which we now know was not the case.
Without significant sales within days (not weeks) the offering is a lose/lose scenario. If the share increase is not suthorized they simply go out of business in the next quarter or two for lack of funds. If the share count is approved and they dilute without a significant sales announcement the share price goes back to pennies. A merger or acquisition would give a small pop, but it would not be lasting.
The idea that Printrite was in beta until a year or so ago is laughable. That actually may have been the case but that is clearly not how the company represented the product to both customers and shareholders. They are simply not believeable on many levels. It will be interesting to see how they hype the results to0day, whichever way it turns out.
"The terms cannot legally be announced" Well......we do know something about them. They aren't revenue generating and unless that changes very soon they won't be in business much longer.
Uptick Newswire is a shill for penny stock promoters. This was a paid interview.
I agree with all you said however I am no longer hopeful for success. I am tired of the lack of communication and leaving shareholders in the dark. I've exited over 200,000 shares in the last few days and am now completely out. Good luck to those of you who still "believe"
Gee......I wonder if it has anything to do with the product??
I don't believe that I would read all that much into it. To my knowledge the Cola's don't have children at home, she is a professional and likely enjoys the interaction with other professionals in a work environment.
Silver:
Multiple contingencies here. Any one of which could derail the direction you have chosen:
1. The granting of the patents is clearly undetermined. Maybe/maybe not.
2. Who are the OEM's and end users going to go to for IPQA printing? In my opinion the OEM's are going to be using their own solution first (that's where the revenue is). Secondly, an issue which is rarely discussed here is the uncertainty of SGLB's future. Even assuming SGLB may have the best solution (yet to be proven) what end user is going to risk millions of dollars of production validation on a tiny startup with ten employees operating out of a business incubator? The risks of SGLB disappearing completely will not be lost on any end user who has to choose an IPQA solution going forward.
3. "If PR3D works as advertised"....still very much to be proven. Nobody has yet stepped up to use it in a production environment despite years of trials and testing.
4. Depending upon Cola for anything is more than a stretch. Have you noticed how he has completely disappeared from any announcements or communications about the business.
What is certain is that if the stock dilution is approved the share price wil take a significant hit and the threshhold for any return on earnings will be raised substantially due to the increased number of shares.
"Also, I think that this particular Navajo news is a bit dated, as I can't see them having a separate facility on top of the one Morf3D, Boeing, Honeywell, Lockheed, and others are going to share. That's going to be one HUGE facility; one that's supposed to create FIVE TIMES the number of jobs as the facility that Sintavia has going up."
Navajo Technical University is a New Mexico joke:
Located in the poorest county, in the poorest state in the union.
Household annual incomes average less than $25,000 per annum
The median salary of graduates is only $18,800 ten full years following graduation
Navajo Technical University sports double the violent crime rate of any university in New Mexico (a notoriously high crime state)
The curriculum approximates a high school trades program rather than an accredited university (which it is not)
I'm not sure what the game plan is for Morph3D, Boeing, et al, Perhaps there are huge tax advantages or some other hidden motivation, but they have a very tough job ahead of them to provide a semi-skilled workforce for their manufacturing facility, let alone attracting a professional technical/management team that would put up with living in Crown Point New Mexico. My opinion is that this whole scheme is smoke and mirrors. It's very hard for me to see it ever coming to fruition.
Disgusted by the lack of communications with shareholders. The entire board along with management should be dismissed.