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.
How is this "very positive"? 2011 Q4 revenues were $250K and 2012 Q1 revenues were $200K. That's a decrease of 25%. And didn't Steipp say that they started shipping parts during December and would continue to this year? That means in 1 month they made their $250K for 2011 Q4, yet in 3 months of Q1 2012 they made 25% less in sales?
Im in at .47 and 42 not selling, but ouch it hurts
Looks more like a "M" to me. :)
I'm not sure what your point was watts, but whatever it was, it was lost in your incorrect math and missing logic. The dollar figures I used were accurate based on simple division based on a given amount of dilution - and all with a static stock price. What you said was that if you just put "don't" in front of every one of my hypotheticals that you could do the opposite math with my calculations. Unfortunately, your math and logic were wrong.
If you put "don't" in front of my "issue shares" hypothetical, the only thing that you change is whether or not they issue shares, so the only math you can change is whether or not to dilute the amount of investment. If the shares are not issued, and assuming the stock price stays the same (which most of my hypotheticals did), then the value of the investment doesn't change - and it certainly doesn't double or quadruple! You can't just make up math to support an opposite possibility! Everyone one of your calculations is based on shorting a stock that increases in value. If you were trying to prove the possiblity of the opposite of what I said, I'm sorry, but you failed.
Of course, you could have done so by simply saying, "But what if they never issue another single share? Then nothing changes, right?" And I would have said, "Yes Watts, that is correct! But now read my latest post about how authorizing more shares was not necessary to prevent a buyout, so what other logical reason would there be to authorize shares unless they are planning on issuing more shares?"
Ok, for all of the posters who believe that management only wants to authorize 100M new shares to be able to maintain a 50% majority, and avoid a possible unwanted buyout, think about this...
The current institution and insider ownership is 43M out of 160M shares, or 27% of the total outstanding shares. They are currently authorized to issue another 140M shares if needed. If they were to issue just 75M shares to insiders or people they could control, they would then control 118M out of the total 235M outstanding shares. This would give them a 50.2% majority, and thus they could avoid an unwanted buyout.
So if they only need to issue 75M shares to maintain a 50% majority vote, and they are already authorized to issue up to 140M shares right now, then why do we need another 100M authorized shares for?!?
So you know for sure that LQMT is not going to issue any more shares anytime soon, even if they authorize another 100M? If you paid 38 cents for 210K shares, you spent about $80,000 on your LQMT investment. If they decide to authorize 100M more, for a total of 240M authorized shares, will you still believe, 100% for sure, that they will not issue any more shares? Are you sure enough to gamble your $80,000?
I sure hope you're right, because if they do authorize another 100M shares, and then decide that they need to issue shares because they are running at a monthly loss, you could take a substantial loss. Even if they just issue the 100M shares that they add to the AS, your $80,000 will then be worth $49,230. If they issue the full 140M that are currently authorized, and decide to keep the recently added 100M as authorized only, your $80,000 will then be worth $42,667. Are you still 100% confident that LQMT will not be issuing any more shares anytime soon?
And don't forget that if they are authorizing shares to only use if a hostile takeover attempt occurs, if it does happen, and they decide to issue all remaining 240M shares, your $80,000 will then be worth $32,000 - that's a 60% haircut. Also, this is all if the share price stays where it's at right now, before any further dilution occurs! If the share price were to drop to say 25 cents before then, your $80,000 could be worth anywhere from $32,300 (if only 100M shares are issued) down to $21,000 (if all 240M have to be issued). You might need the stock to double, and double again, just to break even!
Now I know these are all hypotheticals, but so is the idea that the extra 100M authorized shares are only to prevent a hostile takeover.
I know exactly what the companies worth. When we closed today it was .35 a share. Now if we say we need a 100,000,000 more shares it worth about .24 a share.
Hey Pappy. That means they are posting the announcement for the earnings report and conference call. They have to put the site down in order to do that. My God, that means OTIS is working OVERTIME. I thought we could not afford such extravagances.
if they already have shares that they havent issued,140mm, what makes everyone think they will issue the new 100mm anytime soon
I'm confused. It says
The Letter Agreements originally permitted us to “put” up to an aggregate of $2,500,000 in shares of our Class A common stock to Calm Seas during a two year period ending on the second anniversary of the effective date of the registration statement in which this prospectus is contained. As of the date of this prospectus, we have put to Calm Seas an aggregate of $845,000 resulting in issuance to Calm Seas of 16,053,879 shares under the 2009 Letter Agreement. As a result, the Letter Agreements currently permit us to put to Calm Seas up to $1,555,000 in shares of our Class A common stock.
Where did you see anyone basing any trades on 20 minutes of missing data? We were talking about the sell to buy ratio for the day, not the last 20 minutes.
As of 1:09pm CST, it is showing the last trade at 1:54pm EST. It says at the bottom of the page that OTC stocks are delayed by 20 minutes, which is standard for a free service.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=trades&symbol=LQMT
I see 1.5M sells and 969K buys. What do you see?
I disagree that there are too many sellers.
In a market, the number of sellers equals the number of buyers.
You can never have too many sellers or too many buyers.
Do you know the basics of supply and demand?
He also said that kblb is now where aapl was when Steve Jobs first took over the company. The stock was so cheap then selling for just $5.00 a share. The comparison is telling. Those who bought aapl at those prices are now very very wealthy. Long term is a relatively unknown phrase these days, since traders want to become rich in two months. Buy kblb, and put the shares away for at least five years, and you will be a happy camper.
Right, I get that. But that's not what you said in the context of that discussion. You said that traders would not miss the boat on a high-volume move...and I disagree. To me, the "boat" is not achieving quick gains off of momentum, which you would certainly get, but rather the patience to ride the tides of higher PPS than a trader is normally willing to go. I just wanted to clarify that difference. There is virtue to both types of mentalities on a promising stock such as this.
Come on, man. You know that's not the way daytrading works. On a stock that goes from .15 to .60 in a four day period, you will not be in it most of the time. You might buy at .22 and take profits at .26...then again at .36 and be out at .43ish.
The only times you will make substantial money is on a momentum play, during which a stock like this might rocket .30 in a short burst and you take a chance on chasing it. But if this stock eventually hits $70 (who knows?), you'll only make a fraction of what the investors do.
Risk/reward, man.
I'm taking your word that your good at timing.
You of all people should be happy there are holders or you wouldn't have a stock to trade.
I'm not a trader. I'm sure you've made money. So have I.
You go your way and I'll go mine. Did I just write a Steve Perry song?
I don't understand why so many people use the "I may have stayed in instead of selling for a profit, but good luck getting back in to all of you that sold! When news hits, it's going shoot straight up faster than you can buy back in!".
On the run-up in 2010, it went from 0.32 to 0.50 to 0.52 to 0.93 to 1.76. It took 4 days! The run-up over the last week went from from 0.15 to 0.19 to 0.28 to 0.33 to 0.53, and again, it took 4 days. Anyone that is watching this for a run-up is going to be at least checking the opening and/or closing prices every day, so even if they miss the 1st day, they will still be able to get in on the 2nd day.
If someone sold out at 0.48, and it drifts back down to the low twenties, they can either buy twice as much as they had and wait for another run-up, or they can wait until the 1st day of the next run-up and still buy back in under their 0.48 sell price. I know everyone here wants to believe that even if it goes into the low teens or low 20's, that it's going to jump to $1 (a 300-700% gain) instantly when AAPL finally uses Liquidmetal, but that's just not reality.
Ever hear of sell the rumor?
Fact is much stronger than Fiction, Baby.
I have a feeling that your post was all mojo-aimed sarcasm, but if not, you're confusing part-to-whole. You are a KBLB shareholder, you are part of the investment community, but the investment community includes lots of other investors that are not KBLB shareholders.
All KBLB shareholders are part of the investment community.
Not all members of the investment community are KBLB shareholders.
Short term capital gains tax is 30%
lol, anytime Watts. Vent away.
But I am a glass 100% full kind of guy... it's 50% water, and 50% air. ;)
I also want to make clear that if I give off a glass half-empty vibe, it's only about the reason behind the run-up, not about the fundamentals or the possibilities about this company. If I didn't think this company was going anywhere, I wouldn't have any shares invested. I'd probably still be here trading, since the volatility is so inviting, but I certainly wouldn't have money put away waiting for "the big one".
Again, I wish you (and everyone else here) nothing but good fortune, so if you take any issue what anything that I say, please just let me know. I will continue to read and enjoy posts where you offer your opinions, and when I have time, and see the need, I will probably continue to offer mine. :)
sojomy ... the final paragraph of your post to Watts implies that you think the activity on message boards in some way actually has an effect on the price movement of a stock. You don't actually believe that do you? I sure hope not. These message boards are nothing but a pimple on the arse of a giant when it comes to what drives pps of any stock ... even a pinksheet stock.
Since August-Sep 2010 I have been extremely skeptical in my posts. You probably need to read Yahoo again to find out I have challenged Steipp many times, and even as recent as his PR discussing "in the midst of shipping" So in that respect, I have been a lot more negative than you.
I asked you to clarify your answer on the number of outstanding shares since you left the rest of us hanging with an open ended, albeit response. Since then, I have decided that it is not out of reach to discuss the "equivalent" upside to 80 cents, even though you believe them to be substantially different.
I think that they are substantially the same. In one case, the sep 10 run up was based upon a false "expectation" or "rumor" if you will, that future revenues would automatically come to LQMT because of the MTA of that time frame. Now we are dealing with a similar run up based upon a rumor, but this time, the odds of the rumor being correct (hopefully sooner than too later) are far more likely to occur than the false expectations of the Sep 2010 run. You see, there is actually a lot more known now than was known then. There was no knowledge of a new injection molding process, it was only hinted at. Today it is a fact. It is also a fact that it does work. Only the efficiency is being improved upon. Fact. In 2010, there was no list of 80 NDA's and 900 plus inquiries. Today there is. In 2010, the patent applications concerning several major process changes, formulation changes, and those concerning injection molding and new electric arc technologies are solid fact. In 2010 there was not a hint of a change in business plan strategy, in a change of CEO and a whole new Slate of Directors. Today, all of these are a fact. In 2010 there was no hint of billion dollar revenue companies like Materion and Engel bailing out Liquidmetal by up fronting capital investment. Nor was there a hint of a sub contractor partner VISSER who is also upfronting capital. Finally, there was no finality in 2010 that LQMT could sell the Pyong Taek Facility and equipment as it was tied up in litigation both with the Korean Govt and the Kong Min Bank (not going to bother to look up the correct spelling). Nor was there a hint of spinning off the interest we had in the coatings business. TODAY. ALL OF THOSE OLD FACTORS OF UNCERTAINTY are behind us.
You imply that I can not accept the possibility of another major downside. Sir, I have lived through every major downside of this company since the IPO in Tampa Florida. I have lived through a change of 5 accounting firms. i have lived through a Class Action Suit. A Criminal Fraud case, a relocation of headquarters 4 times. I have lived through a down sizing from 215 plus employees down to 15. Do you still believe I cannot accept the possibility of another downside? Only a fool would not accept that eventuality. But frequently, those who have watched a 9 year slide just can't get it through their heads that such a slide can ever win. Do you know how many times LQMT almost went bankrupt? How about at least once every year for the past 9.
So with caution only, even as late as the first upside due to this rumor, I insisted to this board even that the run up really is not about Apple. This run up is due to a major structural and psychological market view of LQMT as a going concern. This is where we differ in our views, sir. And strongly. This rebound we are seeing here is not what you would probably like to call it, a dead cat bounce.
Best wishes to you. I noticed you did not respond at all to my suggestion that LQMT has great potential to have major contracts in the electronics are with the military and government agencies who need reliable communications devices which are contemporary and more reliable and sturdy due to potential use of liquidmetal components...........totally unrelated to Apple's consumer electronics monopoly.
I think you need to address that before you insist that I cannot accept opposing views. I challenge YOU to accept MY opposing views.
Thanks and good luck to you, whether I hear from you again or not.
PS and I hope you don't take offense, please regard your post which demonstrates your own ability to understand opposing views:
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=74614195
I guess we all can make mistakes. So, smile, and have a nice day.
I would not argue about or around a benjo, because they are very handy when you are in need of one.
Watts, I'm sorry I didn't reply to your post from last night right away, but I have a full-time job and an almost-as-full social life. I'll try to reply to as much as I can now...
Thank you for such a considered and informative post. You made some excellent clarifications for me and for one, I am very appreciative.
I agree that the two run-ups are different. The one in Sep 2010 was based upon fact, but the details of not future revenue were not known, in full. But in time, became very clear. However, a decline from $1.76 back down to 11.5 cents hardly seemed justifiable. I guess, in general, one could ask if we were better off today than we were in Sep of 2010, and I would say yes, because the capabilities of the material and the perception that Apple will fully utilize this technology have resulted in over 80 NDA's for Liquidmetal to develop into commercial business. We did not have this base of potential on our doorsteps in Sep 2010.
For the purist, who only looks at the current balance sheet and income statement of the 10K for 2011, granted one struggles to make a pps valuation. What is more meaningful, the lack of birds we have in our current financial condition, or the expectation of futures revenues from those out in the bush? Very hard to decide. I guess I fall on the side of the more forward looking, the positive changes in mgmt which are effecting a turn-around and an entirely new business model supported by the capital of three different partners.
With all your research on the dates, you still didn't recognize for me which of the dilution possibilities was in effect based upon the actual history. I am sorry if I missed that.
Can you clarify it any ways, assuming the two events are analogous, i.e. that the rumor is in fact closer to the truth than fiction, at least for an October release. I don't really agree with your 50% differential for a June date being wrong if it slipped into an October date....Sure, it doesn't seem likely for June, but the probability for a happening INCREASE as the slippage in date of release occurs........so something wrong in your 50 50 probability, particularly when slippage in delivery dates are more frequent than not, even with Apple.
However, it does seem quite prudent, for one to have a long term account and a short term trading account. this is where I have erred in the past and intend to remedy. Because you drove this point home, as obvious as it ought to be, I value the post if only for this.
Good luck to you.
I guess I was trying to get your idea of where we are in the current run up and when we should get a pullback even if this is only rumor based.
By the way, you don't think the KEP project in the military, which is not really a rumor, but is happening as we speak, with a Sep 2012 deadline for completing preparations for a trial production run is not important. Should not be factored into the current pps. Please read the KEP program and, if you will, tell me how an analyst should crank in these expectations in the PPS, independent of the Apple rumor. Thanks.
Watch out: maybe we get a gap close at 0.45$ during the lunch break
"The second killer app is battery life. That will be addressed at some point with a fuel cell. If I didn't have to worry about recharging my phone no matter who makes it I buy that phone. We've all seen the patent on the LQMT fuel cell by AAPL."
Just another avenue for lqmt
It appears that I erred. At the time of the Sep 10 MTA agreement and the run up to 1.76, I think it is safe to say that the outstanding shares was 80 million, not the 43 I first reported. Therefore, the dilution since then has only been two fold. This would mean, then, that an equivalent to the. 1.76 run up would be about 83 cents in terms of today's 160 million shares.
6/30/2010 49.25M
8/20/2010 84.7M
3/15/2012 160M
Accordingly, I would say that we are only half-way (41 cents) on our way up to the equivalent 88 cents peak of the Sep 2010 run up. This is why I think we will, inspite of some necessary pullbacks, see a continued run up to the 80 cent level in the coming months, if not weeks.
In other words, I think the sep 2010 expectation has been met. This is a new base in the forties.
They generally come out in the fall every year.
the license fee WAS a one-shot deal, but a license normally provides royalties. Therein lies the open, unknown end:
i saw this. I've been following LQMT since sykes first alerted it a couple years ago.
...
but then i remembered that Apple only has the rights to the use of liquid metal in phones and similar devices. LQMT is free to sell the tech for other purposes (like wristwatches, for example)
ES1, sorry, forgot to finish my post. That was just for the $50 million company. If we did have a deal with a company that does $2 billion (technically billions, plural), and they have 10% profit margins, we are 20 percent of their costs, we have a 20% profit margin, and we have a 20 multiple, that makes $360 million in sales, $72 million in profit, 12.6 cents in earnings per share, and an addition of $2.50 to the share price.
Someone please check my math, I'm multitasking.
Sorry, let me rephrase. He obviously doesn't know how the company to stock market relationship works.
I have never said I was getting rich in this stock. I wouldn't put 1 penny that I couldn't afford to lose in a penny stock. But be honest, look at short term time frames on a long term chart of KBLB and tell me that this is not a great stock to swing trade?
The SMALLEST is 50 million in sales. So what IS 50 million in sales.
...
iPad sales may approach 50 million in 2012
The market needs to see Kim in the media putting his reputation on the line by simply reassuring investors that Monster silk is a product with physical properties desired by industry, and that commercial deals with several companies are in the works. What don't you understand about trust?
KBLB share price IS based on speculation and possibilities, but it is very narrow minded to think until we have sales shares should be worth so little.
If the cc was believed by the market, speculation of sales would have risen greatly and the possibilities of future products also. The pps should have risen accordingly, but it didn't because of the market's refusal to recognize KBLB as a viable company capable of those accomplishments.
I'm right and you're wrong, no two ways about it.
So those that loaded under .07 a few months ago and sold above .08, can now load up again at or below .07. Traders be winning
Yeah, it all sounds good on paper, but that's like saying, "I can just sell at the top and buy back at the bottom". That almost never happens. And according to Yahoo Finance and Scottrade, there is no short interest in this stock. If you can find another site that shows an amount of short interest, please let me (and everyone else) know about it.
UPDATED. Sorry, I found out that there is about 49K shares currently shorted. That's out of 570 million. So (probably) one person is shorting KBLB, and only 49K shares. That's $3500. So your example of $75000 is a little far-fetched.
Updated again! Just for everyone else's reference, the place I checked short sales was on the OTC market's website
www.otcmarkets.com/stock/kblb/short-sales
And there is only 1 day to cover, so I don't see how anyone could be shorting long term.
And for the retail investor that panicked and sold, it's still his fault for selling. As cold as it sounds, every trader is responsible for every trade they made. Unless someone forces you at gunpoint to trade shares (buy or sell), you made your own decision. If it was an uninformed or misinformed decision, it's still your fault for trading based on non-factual information.
I'm sure I sound like an a.$h01e, but I'm not hypocritical. I've made stupid trades based on things I read on message boards, and I felt stupid afterwords. But I never blamed anyone other than myself.
The wording is what one would expect (and there is only ONE incorrect letter in "homozygousity" (an a instead of an i) which could easily be a typo.
What we don't know is at what point homozygosity was achieved.