www.gofundme.com/fundlarah
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.
That's how I read it....Which I hadn't heard as public information lol way to go mark....(not)
To anyone who bought, you're welcome! (+300% in a week, MEGA VOLUME) only 6,250,000 outstanding shares, moves quick.
$SGLB up 300% in a week, all white candles, MEGA VOLUME. Only 6,250,000 shares outstanding.
$SGLB up 300% in a week, all white candles, MEGA VOLUME. Only 6,250,000 shares outstanding.
So I might be onto something with the ASCM bid/ask?
I didn't mean selling en masse- just noticed they were on both sides of bid/ask and I hadn't seen them before. It may be nothing, I was just curious cause I remembered them. If they were selling a little here and there it wouldn't be a bad thing- ATM prices would be a nice way to raise a little $ without a major hit to the share price.
Ascendiant Capital Markets, on the OTC markets page, (or L2), which shows what market makers are buying/selling at what price.
Anyone notice ASCM has appeared? [That's who we had our A-T-M shelf offering through]. Is that significant?
Got back in a few days ago....+100% so far. [albeit, still down mega% since the old days- haha] I am still feeling cautious though- will likely sell the principal and let the free $ ride awhile, but glad to see this coming back from the grave.
SGLB 6m contract!+60% (6m=more than its valuation this morning).
I'm with you wick.... Historically that sort of thing has always been their MO so would not surprise me. It has been my fear for a couple years but the developments with Honeywell seemed smart at holding things at bay.... however now seeing how GE is gobbling up whole printer companies I'm thinking they'll want everything vertically integrated (as they normally do) if they even want printrite at all. Also if you look at the fine print on the America Makes program (the overall initiative not the specific projects) there is language about IP sharing and access that is troubling. I am not saying it WILL happen, but that it could pretty easily.Still watching and waiting here- would love to be wrong!
Wow volume is gone, but at least the bleeding is more of a slow trickle..... still hanging out on the sidelines here, (I guess I'm jaded, but after holding long for YEARS, I fear that trickle may just keep dripping for awhile.... half percent here, one percent there, to where you don't really notice til one day you see it's wayyy down from where you were a month or two before...) but I will buy back in full if it goes low enough or something new develops. (I'm still holding my lone sad watching share lol). They really need to pull a rabbit out of the hat soon.
He said no about materialise and was as in the dark as the rest of us on when/if it would occur
I have no idea because he mentioned "Arete-Sigma" bringing in money this last cc when asked about contract manufacturing and said the machine was booked til EOY (but nothing substantial). I swear, it's like they're just giving things away.... like those "starving artists" you see at street fairs who might have beautiful paintings but that they sell for $20
whoa- a million dollar computer? I missed that- what the heck...
Re: SGLB Confession/Analysis....
Most of you know i've been a long (loooong) shareholder since April 2013. Like many posters I am embarrassed to think about the real (and profit) losses I've taken on this stock over time- though I did get a few things out of it, years ago. I still 100% believe in the technology and its usefulness. That said, I sold all but one share after CC, still watching/waiting for bottom or other developments. I am sure mark is a brilliant scientist- his work in metallurgy is solid-- resume and connections superb--but the R/S with no plan, unnecessary hires, and leveraging of IP (aka the only thing that makes this company feasible) are extremely concerning to me- and I do believe that without major contracts they will either have to dilute late winter/spring, or fold. Like many have said, I do think the industry WILL adopt IPQA in some form, but it will be at least a year (2018 ish) before alternative QA is really on most company's radar-- traditional methods work, if less cost effectively, the learning curve is very steep, and integration will take time, which is something SGLB doesn't have a lot of without a major injection of funds. It seems Alan was right- mark is no businessman and I was floored by his unpreparedness and general admission of powerlessness at the CC. (SGLB's success is totally dependent on these industrial behemoths adopting IPQA quickly- which, though possible, is unlikely given the current pace of things). I will continue to follow this stock with hopefulness, and if they do lose their IP, will buy shares of whatever company ends up with it, because I do think it's a game changer- just maybe not right this second. I'm keeping the salvaged $ in brokerage so if it appears to bottom, or something positive develops, will buy again, but to me the risk of having a few less shares in the case of a good development is nothing compared to losing even more than I already have. :/ I sincerely hope the best for all of you, especially those who've been in this as long or longer than me.
Quality is almost always at odds with production. I know of a metals plant built a few decades ago, they added quality on as an afterthought. It was not on anyone's mind until the end, and only because the gov't (DOTs nuclear whatevers etc) required them to meet certain standards, and trying to explain metallurgical principles along with a whole new method I imagine is difficult. It is probably not first priority to many companies buying the additive buzz because they don't really understand it yet. Even at GE, the ones who WOULD understand it don't have the clout to purchase/do anything about it, since their engineers/scientists are more of a "nerd farm" (you've seen their commercials with that "Owen"). I had a buddy in college, real smart, who applied there as an engineer, with visions of engineering maybe a decade, and moving up into management, and the guy told him, you should probably go elsewhere, we like our engineers and tech guys to stay that way-- we'd take you, but you'd basically be a cog in a wheel. My husband got mad at them too because their HR rep at some job thing was convinced they don't hire metallurgists, or physicists, even though my husband had looked at specific jobs that said otherwise and he wisecracked, "Yeah, cause physics is totally not important for flight." Lol [Terrible].
Thanks whoever did that..... this is pretty ugly.
I can't call in, just joined mid QA. Can someone/did someone ask about the patents? Do we stand risk to lose them if they can't deliver sales soon?
Progress....
Will preliminary report drop before open?
Perhaps one of our "dots" making announcement at Formnext? Wanted to have cc closer to that? Also, if so, [total longshot here] what if our loan was not to keep the lights on but something in relation to meeting standards for uplisting, to be accomplished in conjunction with major contract announcement(s) next week? Just a theory. I'm feeling optimistic today but it really is down to the wire for this company. I've been invested this long, not going anywhere- but if theyre not doing something by spring it's bad news.
Here's something that sounds a bit more positive, from same time frame.... http://www.engineering.com/3DPrinting/3DPrintingArticles/ArticleID/12251/Additive-Industries-Evolves-Metal-3D-Printing-at-RAPID-2016.aspx
I think 8354608 is most important (the controlled melt pool one). Did they pony up that one also? As far as i know- the applied for ones you mention haven't been granted yet? [2016xxx...]
As heavily as they've guarded that (GE not knowing "how to value" them, etc) let's hope they know what they are doing. I am both excited and terrified, haha.
I'm going to be really mad if the "investors" are GE and Honeywell and they get our patents ("collateral") for nothing... [lol. Ok, so I'm a conspiracy theorist.] Really though, would like to know what the company has put at stake IP wise. Otherwise, it sounds good....or as good as these sort of things can at any rate! We're nearing the finish line.... one way or the other we should know a great deal in the next 6 months.
The word used was "assets," not cash, and I believe last Q's assets were about 2M because they include the printer and IP
263,000 for the rest of the year seems low....Isn't their burn rate significantly higher than that? And does that include the approx 250k [from memory-don't quote me!] expected/pending revenue mentioned in last Q report? because that would mean a measly extra 13k for 6 months of work?
I'm not going anywhere- been in it this long (since 2013!) might as well weather a bit more... the numbers just don't seem to add up, unless I'm missing something?
Remember that time Mark said closed loop IPQA was not the end all be all (something to that effect) due to the emphasis on 3rd party inspection in aerospace? PrintRite 3d can be incorporated INTO the machines (such as, I think, with additive industries/ MetalFAB1?) and actually close the loop... but it can also provide 3rd party QA that is machine agnostic- which I think it the bigger draw, certainly near term, and especially for aerospace.... and also for complying with ISO standards. Many of these companies already have a ton of 3D printers as is-- GE certainly has a lot. It's not like they are going to scrap all the old ones all of a sudden, they bought those companies because they will need more in the future and are big into vertical integration/ controlling their supply chain.... probably will phase them out over time when they have exceeded their usefulness, but it's going to be over years, and their orders need to start being produced en masse very soon. PrintRite can't provide closed loop quality control without being integrated into the machine somehow (like, it would have to communicate with the controls of the printer itself) BUT it CAN provide In-Process Quality Assurance-- where it alerts the manufacturing engineer when conditions arise where defects are likely to occur so they can hold-tag and recalibrate, rather than running a whole day and have a whole day or shift's worth of scrap. If that makes sense. It is still a huge cost/time savings because right now they inspect after the fact and it takes a day or two to do all the tensile tests, etc meaning if a part is out of spec the entire run will be scrapped. [My husband works in quality/metallurgy so I hear all about it]
Interesting. I have noticed MC referring to the "IIoT" a lot the last 6-9 months or so. Hope you're right!
You don't think they just ripped it off do you? I wondered that awhile ago...but I feel like someone maybe posted a Predix connection a few months ago that made me feel better... [lol] anyone remember anything about it? I always heard GE was notorious for ripping off people's IP. They're so big they can just crush any opposition by dragging out the lawsuits until the players/companies suing them go bankrupt and the moment has passed.
This sounds like it is ISO 9001 compliant....
I mean.... that's just how 3D printing works, "layer by layer". So, no. But the fact that we took Honeywell's feedback (and other early adopters) to tweak the product is not a dot, but a publicly released fact, and a very good thing.
I like this part:
I would think some of it has to do with how complicated the install on site is, also. All manufacturing is not created equal haha. Some could be older machines, or the monitoring setup (where the engineers are) can vary, or the amount of training that needs to be done for said engineers. Our guys go on site and do all that. I think maybe the problem is they are so used to being consultants they still have the consulting business model/mindset- whereas if they are serious about sales they need to switch to more consistent pricing, I agree.
22% recurring.
Haha- I know morning quotes don't mean anything, but the Bid: $.01 Ask: $200 showing on I-hub made me chuckle. GLTA today. :)
I agree with you about everything except it appears Woodward's $$ may be next Q because it looks like the agreement was made in early July, and as has been the case previously- it takes awhile for the actual $ to show up. It may however be discussed in the report, as an additional/recent development, which is almost as good as actually posting haha.
Lol my thoughts exactly...