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.
Read. The. Email. Screenshots.
Best wishes everyone.
I say the manufacturing supply agreement is proof. You can’t prove they don’t!
I fail to see how an actual email from yihao saying they are making apple watch parts and are in mass production is a pump or a rumor.
Helena Zeng. Sales manager at yihao
There are actual emails from yihao now. Read them.
Obviously Liquidmetal. The 8k is proof of the contract. The manufacturer supply agreement with yihao was necessary because the PLA with yihao/eontec specifically EXCLUDES consumer electronics. (Think about it—No manufacturer supply agreement was needed for zyris, martin guitar, etc. Why? Because the PLA already contemplated non consumer electronics.) therefore an agreement had to be put in place to protect Liquidmetal and its assigns (Apple) because this IS a consumer electronic part and the PLA does not contemplate the manufacturing of consumer electronics or their parts. The agreement with yihao and the 8k were absolutely necessary and could not be avoided. Apple Watch. The emails from a yihao employee stating that they are in “mass production” of “Liquidmetal die cast parts” for the “Apple Watch” are clear proof—those are the exact words she used. Exact words. (And she gave samples of colors using the Liquidmetal logo.) There’s more DD to support this in addition to what I’ve typed here, but this is enough for you to think about now. You literally have several emails from yihao sent to two different people and an 8k manufacturing supply agreement with a 5 year commitment. If you can’t see that this is revenue for Liquidmetal from the Apple Watch and manufactured by yihao (and others) then you just aren’t reading it correctly. Don’t get caught up in the “what ifs”—read the emails. We have never had direct proof in this way—ever—now you do, backed by an 8K. Enjoy your super stock-LQMT. Now, if you reply, stick only to what I’ve typed here—if you can refute this with facts and actual DD from real sources then I’ll reply—stay clear of opinion without backup data (as I have). If you go down a second or third path without addressing what I’ve typed here first, I won’t reply because it will then be a waste of my time—I’m not chasing red herrings today.
The 8k is proof of the contract. The manufacturer supply agreement with yihao was necessary because the PLA with yihao/eontec specifically EXCLUDES consumer electronics. (Think about it—No manufacturer supply agreement was needed for zyris, martin guitar, etc. Why? Because the PLA already contemplated non consumer electronics.) therefore an agreement had to be put in place to protect Liquidmetal and its assigns (Apple) because this IS a consumer electronic part and the PLA does not contemplate the manufacturing of consumer electronics or their parts. The agreement with yihao and the 8k were absolutely necessary and could not be avoided. Apple Watch. The emails from a yihao employee stating that they are in “mass production” of “Liquidmetal die cast parts” for the “Apple Watch” are clear proof—those are the exact words she used. Exact words. (And she gave samples of colors using the Liquidmetal logo.) There’s more DD to support this in addition to what I’ve typed here, but this is enough for you to think about now. You literally have several emails from yihao sent to two different people and an 8k manufacturing supply agreement with a 5 year commitment. If you can’t see that this is revenue for Liquidmetal from the Apple Watch and manufactured by yihao (and others) then you just aren’t reading it correctly. Don’t get caught up in the “what ifs”—read the emails. We have never had direct proof in this way—ever—now you do, backed by an 8K. Enjoy your super stock-LQMT. Now, if you reply, stick only to what I’ve typed here—if you can refute this with facts and actual DD from real sources then I’ll reply—stay clear of opinion without backup data (as I have). If you go down a second or third path without addressing what I’ve typed here first, I won’t reply because it will then be a waste of my time—I’m not chasing red herrings today.
Proof of a ce contract: actual emails from yihao saying they are in mass production of diecast Liquidmetal parts for the Apple Watch. 6 screenshots. https://www.reddit.com/r/LQMT/comments/srtp9o/proof_apple_is_using_liquidmetal_and_is_in_mass/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
See the link in the previous post showing screenshots of actual emails from yihao saying they are in mass production for die-cast Liquidmetal parts for the Apple Watch! The link also shows color samples. No refuting and crystal clear. Proof.
Idra is owned 100% by LK technology. LK technology makes the eontec/Liquidmetal machines. LK makes the base machine—eontec makes the modifications that enable Liquidmetal.
Liquidmetal will negotiate this and all revenue will flow through Liquidmetal for North American and European customers. That is clear. Read the PLA. Yihao and eontec will be contract manufacturers for Liquidmetal, just as they are for zyris, Martin, etc.
He has to run revenue through Liquidmetal legally due to the PLA. All sales made to Europe and NA customers are Liquidmetal’s and must channel through Liquidmetal. The recent change of accounting firms supports this as well since the previous accounting firm was not versed only global accounting.
Nothing amiss. Infrastructure in place. Q4.
Zr-based Liquidmetal and stainless steel composite made via high-pressure die casting. Large tensile plasticity in Zr-based metallic glass/stainless steel interpenetrating-phase composites prepared by high pressure die casting-- Lugee Li
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S135983682100603X
Zirconium based Liquidmetal in full production.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LQMT/comments/sdkbc0/horse_before_the_cartfinallytrain_has_the_left/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
iPhone 13 pro interesting writing on the edge of the inner frame—not on the outer frame.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LQMT/comments/sdp8ww/inside_the_sim_card_slot_on_the_iphone_13_pro_how/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Apple frame via lens technology, yihao, and Liquidmetal. Pics here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/LQMT/comments/sd5on9/apple_frame_vialens_technologyyihaoliquidmetal/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Apple is coming…soon
Right, that’s what my follow up post said too—the one with the link. We’re on the same page now.
Go baby go!
This sounds just like Apple—the yihao agreement says: “ certain confidential information identified by bracketed asterisks “[*****]”, has been omitted from this exhibit because it is both (I) not material and (II) would be competitively harmful of publicly disclosed.”
The cost plus % amount and the General liability insurance limit amount are both bracketed.
Plus the $30,000,000 forex for a USD paying customer!
Makes sense
Here’s a quote and a link about Liquidmetal clubs—they are a no go:
“This is why many sport brands started producing liquid metal golf clubs, like Mizuno, Maruman Golf or Bridgestone Sport and that’s why you can buy online numerous types of high end bulk metallic glass golf clubs.
But… there’s a problem and it’s name is “USGA”, the United States Golf Association. The USGA limits the coefficient of restitution to 86% and this is far less than the liquid metal alloys are capable of delivering.
A liquid metal driver or a liquid metal putter must be artificially dampened through construction to comply with USGA standards, otherwise it would be illegal.
It sounds like you can drive a Ferrari, but you are stuck in traffic around the London freeway during the rush hour. Driving a Ferrari or a Subaru become the same thing.
Of course, BMG is the Ferrari of the metal alloys!”
Link: https://www.bulkmetallicglass.it/en/bulk-metallic-glass-blog/liquid-metal-golf-clubs
Right I think the limit is placed on the coefficient of inertia off the club face which Liquidmetal’s old clubs surpassed. I could easily be wrong here—just going from memory.
I would think that Apple prefers cost plus so that they can control raw material pricing by negotiating on their own. I could be wrong though. So many angles to think about here!
The more I read it I think so too. Still trying to digest it all. Good to have some news!
Right. Strange. Gonna be fun to read all of this!
The “ban” had to do with the amount of “bounce” from the face of the club. Remember the bouncing ball demo from Liquidmetal? I don’t know the scientific term but I remember reading that the pga limited the amount of “bounce” from the club face. This came after the Liquidmetal clubs were proven to hit the ball farther due to the tech.
I agree, this is beef! Finally.
Right now I still think the yihao contract is separate—possibly Apple. Still reading though. The capacity phrase in 2.5 seems to say “all” yihao’s manufacturing capacity plus 10%. Still reading but this could in theory lock yihao up completely to Liquidmetal for 5 years yet Liquidmetal leaves itself open to capacity and other manufacturing by saying yihao is “non exclusive”. I’m not 100% yet, still reading and thinking about this.
I’m reading now, but I believe the LMG/ATJ is a separate agreement and is not related to the yihao agreement. Still researching but here’s why I think that so far: the contracts have different terms (5 years vs 3 years), the LMG/ATJ portion says that ATJ is manufacturing and doesn’t mention another manufacturing option, and the yihao agreement says they will have to ship to Liquidmetal customers. Since ATJ is a licensee and manufacturing on its own, I don’t this this would apply. Also, Liquidmetal, in the yihao contract says it is seeking us based manufacturing for trade terms—this wouldn’t apply to ATJ at all. Plus amorphous alloys are banned by the PGA in the USA. So right now I think these are separate contracts. Again still looking at it.
WRONG!!! It’s a cost plus contract so it is well defined. Furthermore, it is NON-EXCLUSIVE so Liquidmetal can go to any other manufacturer it wants if it desires to do so. It is closed ended for yihao for 5 years and open ended for Liquidmetal for as long as the end user has a contract with Liquidmetal. That is a great contact for Liquidmetal.
Manipulation effort that was busted bad
Exactly
It’s apple. Proof soon.