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.
Nice wishes from MZ Group for a happy Independence Day and a wonderful summer!
McFish,
This is a shelf registration to sell up to $100 million worth of stock. This is a way to allow big institutions to buy into this incredible story without forcing the individuals to sell to them. The company can execute an offering at any time in the future after the SEC registers the shares. Most likely this will happen after listing on the Nasdaq. With a balance sheet with no debt and $110 million of cash, institutions will want to own this story. Let's just hope there is a commercial partnership announced prior to the company executing some or all of this shelf.
I believe this also means Lincoln Park is done.
What we are witnessing is how a company goes from being 99.99% owned by individuals to 10% owned by institutions. It will be interesting to see the numbers come August 15th.
I am not familiar with this web site that changes the shares outstanding on a daily basis. One possible explanation is that when the stock is shorted, it is also purchased. The total shares owned equals shares outstanding plus the number of shares shorted.
That's why I said before July 21st
4 to 6 weeks to uplist (assuming the application was sent in on 6/8) points to a date before July 21st. That's soon in my book.
Poison pill rights can be cancelled for the right price. All takeovers have a vote by the stockholders whether or not to sell/accept the price offered by the suitor. One of the current strengths of this company is that it is 99% owned by individuals who believe the value of the patents are tens of billions of dollars.
Once we go to the Nasdaq and institutions gradually overtake individuals as a percentage of ownership, then the vote will usually go in favor of the suitor's premium offer price.
We (individuals) decide how fast and at what price we will let institutions share the ownership of this technology. Personally, I believe institutions have already started to buy LWLG after the LD Micro conference.
Can anyone comment on the significance of this announcement by Intel?
Seeking Alpha article yesterday "Intel Takes a Big Step"
SiFive licensing agreement
Exactly the program. The only drawback is that the income is taxed at the same rate as interest income. It is rare that my shares are lent out because I don't own stuff that gets shorted a lot.
I have been there several times with my friend who went to Tatnall. He graduated in 1972. He was QB for the undefeated football team that year.
I have a securities lending account with Schwab. They will call me and ask me if I want to lend my shares out to short sellers and they will give me an interest rate such as 10% and that rate can change every day. If I lend out shares, they are transferred from my regular account into my "Securities Lending Account" so I will know exactly how many shares have been loaned out. The interest is calculated on the value of the stock every day.
So far, my shares have not been lent out, nor have they contacted me.
I will post on this board if my shares are in demand from short sellers.
Thanks for posting that Time, Inc. article, Think1st. I learned a lot from all the background information. I can see how Lightwave Logic can help give a competitive advantage to USA foundries. The only thing that concerns me is, do the foundries have time in their urgent backlog schedule to retool and insert polymers into their production process. I know they want to, but can they?
Steps during the uplisting process:
Step 1. Complete evaluation and submit listing application for pre-approval
Step 2. Board of Directors approves the transfer to Nasdaq (if required)
Step 3. Submit listing agreement and certification to Nasdaq to complete application process and Nasdaq approves
Step 4. Issue press release announcing initial Nasdaq trading date and notify your current exchange
Step 5. File Form 25 and Form 8-A with the SEC and provide current exchange with a copy
This was about a week ago and addresses (or not) the PDK transfer-ability of the PDK
Luke,
I am not sure you will be able to answer this question, but you are the only contact I have to ask. Dr. Michael Lebby has spoken to at least one slide about developing the PDK necessary to manufacture modulators, etc. My question is about the transfer-ability of the PDK. For instance, if a large foundry company has five or six facilities around the world and the PDK was developed at only one facility, would that PDK work for the other facilities? I assume the machining capabilities are different between facilities so the answer is not an obvious one.
Lewrock,
I hope all is well and appreciate you reaching out. We can’t answer as to each and every fab globally, though we are working with PDKs for a silicon foundry platform that share common features/techniques.
Luke,
So if I understand you correctly, the equipment makers such as ASML and LAM are the ones that create the silicon foundry platforms that would have the common features/techniques that would make the PKDs transferable much more so than the corporate entity that owns a specific foundry. Still I find it hard to believe that Global Foundries would accept a PDK developed at an Intel Foundry. Certainly Intel would accept a PDK developed at one of their fabs for all of their fabs that shared the same equipment from LAM or ASML.
One additional question for you. During the Nobel Conference in February 2020, Jim Marcelli made the statement that the founders of LWLG, who came out of Dupont envisioned selling 55 gallon drums of the specially formulated polymers. In more recent presentations, Dr. Lebby refers to having complete control of the formulas for making the polymers. My understanding is that all future customers will need to buy the 55 gallon drums that are made in Colorado and that the company would never permit any company to learn the recipe. Am I correct on that? The reason for my question is because that source of revenue would have a cost of goods sold component, while a technology transfer source of revenue would have a negligible cost of goods sold component.
Lewrock,
We haven’t provided that level of detail regarding our current commercialization plans though I would encourage you to monitor PRs and SEC filings for further developments on that front.
That article seemed a bit biased to me. However, if true, GF will need a competitive edge to win back customers.
Steve, notice the "as of date" being 3/31/21. Around the 1st of August, institutions begin sending in their numbers, but the last date is August 15th (45 days after the quarter). Someday there will be pages upon pages of institutional holders. I find it remarkable that after a small cap conference like Noble, there is still no institutional ownership. Roth and Oppenheimer conferences happened after 3/31/2021 so I expect some names to be listed come August 15th for the quarter ending June 30, 2021.
Steve, here is the link that I use. It is possible that the institution reporting could be holding shares of an individual investor. Try a few different stocks and you will see there are a lot of potential buyers. The site covers OTC stocks as well as NYSE, etc.
https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/lwlg/institutional-holdings
I would bet institutions have been buying LWLG this month. Those reports come out six weeks after the quarter ends or August 15th. Some report sooner, some wait until the last day, but their ownership is as of June 30.
I am talking about analyst’s write ups recommending the purchase of LWLG complete with revenue and earnings projections and price targets coming in six months. The co-authored press releases announcing foundry partnerships could come at any time, but probably after Nasdaq listing.
I look forward to the first commercialization press release officially ending the developmental stage of this company’s evolution. The words used by Dr. Lebby such as Mass Volume and Mass Commercialization are clear!! When the revenue starts, it will not be gradual.
The fundamental analysis by institutional investors is probably six months away, but will be worth the wait. I hope people are not expecting that to be sooner.
Did they all go to Tatnall High School. A good friend of mine was QB of the football team in the early 70's.
The first CEO of Regeneron was previously CEO of Merck. I, too took profits too soon on IDEC.
Once LWLG gets listed on the Nasdaq, it is probable that market makers will establish an options market as well. As I understand it, the company has no influence over whether or not options trade on the stock.
Long Time holders, who may want to take their cost out, may want to think about selling way out-of-the-money calls. By considering this strategy, you will wait until the Nasdaq listing and perhaps a commercialization PR and then get paid your cost basis in time premiums for an obligation to sell at a lot higher price.
A friend of mine suggested it could have been a rebalancing trade for the Russell Index. Who knows except that it is over!
Third day in a row for a 150,000 share dump. My gut tells me LWLG management is putting shares to LPC at ever increasing prices. This new supply gets easily absorbed.
Yesterday and today, there have been an 150,000 share dump. Sure feels like Lincoln Park Capital to me.
I am a technology neophyte! I was a National Sales Manager for a $25 billion company so I understand constructing the value proposition and selling it, but I am not the one to ask about specific applications. As Dr Lebby said: “any application that needs to turn light on and off really really quickly is a potential customer.”
From my research, I read that the typical data center consumes the same power as 200,000 homes or about $200 million per year in utility bills. $100 million in annual savings per year per data center is not chump change!! Not to mention the ground water savings which is a major issue. ESG!!!
Let’s get to work!
May I suggest that “we” begin to focus on what this technology (if completely adopted) will have on companies such as: AT&T, Verizon, Google, Facebook, Intel, Microsoft, etc.
What would the impact be to these company’s earnings and ESG metrics if their data transmission speeds tripled and their power consumption dropped by 50%? How would their press releases read to their stockholders?
What would be the result if 1,000 emails were sent to the Investor Relations contacts or higher of these companies asking when they will be adopting this technology? Hmmmm!
I agree 100% with your prediction!
I also now believe that the company is tapping the remaining line with LPC prior to being listed on the Nasdaq. Having $15 million of cash at the time of listing and no further relationship with LPC is all good for their debut.
Yes! That 150,000 shares of supply near the close was likely from LPC.
I found it to be another non answer to a simple question that I thought had been discussed by management several times. Dr Lebby, through his body language and his voice inflection, has signaled to the shareholders to expect significant Press Releases in the not too distant future. Nobody believes Dr. Lebby or anyone else on the Board of Directors to be "hype mongers" or "pump and dumpsters."
If nothing happens, Dr. Lebby would be in more trouble with the SEC than Elon Musk got into when he talked about taking Tesla private. Lebby is not stupid and would not put himself in that kind of a situation. This is the REAL DEAL, folks!
Guess who wrote this:
We haven’t provided that level of detail regarding our current commercialization plans though I would encourage you to monitor PRs and SEC filings for further developments on that front.
How transferable are the PDKs from one foundry to another? Not sure about this, but it appears that the first PDK is taking about six months to complete. The collective wisdom of this board assumes that foundry is Global Foundries, Inc. My WAG is that the PDK can be quickly used in all GF fabs around the world. Perhaps not! Does it take 6 months for each manufacturing site to be able to produce chips with the LWLG GOO?
An accurate understanding of this timeline should provide some useful information to project the ramp in revenues over the coming years.
If there were a similar report each day showing how much of the volume represented short covering, I think the numbers would be more valuable.
I was thinking about the motivation for yesterday's announcement. Dr. Lebby used the same slide in his ASM meeting presentation and the LD Micro presentation to reveal everything that was written in the press release. The only difference between these three public forums was the audience reached. Why yesterday was chosen to repeat this information makes me somewhat curious as to if there was a motivation.
If a Tier 1 potential customer was on the fence about being the first company to establish an agreement with LWLG without any financial precedent, what might Dr. Lebby do about that? By letting the world know that chip speeds can now be 3x faster and consume half the power, chip buyers will want that tomorrow, if not sooner. If I were a buyer of hundreds of millions of dollars per year of photonic chips, I believe I would be putting maximum pressure on my supplier. Every purchase made today will be obsolete very quickly. If it were possible, I would reduce volumes and ask for price concessions to reflect the obsolescence of my current purchases. Too bad the supply is so tight. Still, I think spreading the value proposition to everyone puts pressure on companies to "sign here!"
Or, it could be that Dr. Lebby got back from vacation two days a go and decided to issue a press release!
I am new to LWLG and have tried to watch every video available and read as much as I can. My question to OGs is about a comment Jim Marcelli made during the Q&A portion of the February 2020 Noble Securities Conference. The question cannot be clearly heard but the answer was: We expect the total market for Silicone Photonics to reach $44 billion in 2025. We think the TAM for Lightwave Logic is about 30% or $10 to $11 billion.
I am sure this statement was discussed hundreds of times on this board. It also appears that Jim Marcelli was advised to clam up about financial projections after that statement. However, his statement cannot be unsaid and it appears to me anyway that this number is completely believable. Also during that conference and probably earlier ones, was the confirmation that prototype chips are being tested by Tier 1 companies. So, here we are 16 months later and the same slides and comments are being used about testing and market size. It seems to me that 16 months of testing is a very long time, but I know nothing about this industry's norms.
Is there a reason this statement by the President of the company is still not being repeated on this board?
Any thoughts on how many LWLG shares are owned by people evaluating the technology within the Tier 1 companies? Does the NDA specifically prevent buying shares in LWLG? Certainly, knowledge of a pending news event that would move the stock is clearly insider trading, but early on in the testing and evaluating stages, one could safely buy shares.
I personally know three institutional money managers and all of them say it is a red flag to have a relationship with LPC. It is simply my opinion that it would be best if the relationship was over when LWLG gets listed on the NASDAQ and the story gets introduced to real money managers.
In the end, the story will dominate over that red flag. A few weeks ago I was introducing LWLG to one of these managers and he immediately noted LPC and I had to convince him to take a good look at the company in spite of that.