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.
Is a reference to a PDK in any foundry as "complete" even a relevant word to describe a PDK in an industry where technology is always advancing and changing?
I am pretty sure that Dr. Lebby has used the word "operational PDK". In my view, that may be as good as it gets. Perhaps "production PDK" may someday be used. Or 'our technology is included in commercial foundry PDKs"
Personally, I am not even looking for the phrase "completed PDK" to come up, ever. If it does great, but so far I do not see the term being thrown around by anyone.
I could easily change my view on this if you provide some examples for awareness that would inform me differently on the use of the term "completed PDK"
"I cringe when I see the Vulcan trying to think he is the second coming of Steve Jobs."
Yes, it is sad, but most of the attacks & criticisms against Dr. Lebby are rooted in envy, whether the posters realize it, or are willing to examine themselves and admit it.
Dr. Lebby is a prolific inventor; an accomplished doctorate that is well-versed in his own and competing technologies; has had inventions that have already made it into widespread use; is a recognized industry leader paving a roadmap forward in an industry in need of a solution where his own proposed path forward is a beacon of light that everyone is talking about.
There are many incumbents that talk downplay it out of fear because it may displace their own technology solutions.
It is high stakes and requires a person like Dr. Lebby to get us there.
I enjoy watching it play out, and it requires patience. I have now had to endure it as long as many, but happy that I have a position, and I plan to add to that position if we have a period of tax loss selling between now and the new year. It may well be your last chances to build a position before launch.
He is the closest thing to Irwin Jacobs I have seen come along since InterDitigital infamously settled with QCOM on CDMA technology. The upside is similar as well, but I agree the business model is closer to OLED. Lebby has been the most aggressive CEO I have seen in promoting the technology both within the industry itself; secondly in setting an industry roadmap and, thirdly promoting adoption of polymers. Additionally he carries the torch to the investment community as well. I would hold less than one tenth the shares I currently hold if Dr. Lebby was not CEO of this company. I believe the underlying motivation for those that do criticize Dr. Lebby is out of envy, whether they will admit it, or not.
Many, many CEOs nowadays came up through the ranks of engineering and technology, so as far as not meeting up to the gravitas of a CEO, he definitely holds the dignity and seriousness needed, so perhaps he is lacking solemnity of manner - I guess waving those Lightwave Logic hand signals must disqualify Dr Lebby as not being solemn enough. Two out of three is not bad, and I could do without solemnity altogether.
Cramer calling a company out is usually a buy signal.
There was a podcast mentioning not all companies have been named, and the use of new materials to achieve performance.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=168994956
Link to pocast:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=169315630&txt2find=podcast
I remain hopeful and I believe LWLG is involved. Perhaps a dreamer- so be it.
All I know is that as chairman & CEO of QCOM, he was a visionary and industry leader just like Dr. Lebby. Both had the clout to go before congress.
Dr Lebby is the closest I have seen to a Dr. Irwin Jacobs come along since QCOM in IDCC settled their lawsuit on CDMA. Amazing that some have no appreciation for it.
Oh how i regret selling my Qcom shares at 60 bucks thinking I made a handsome profit at a cost basis of 10. How shortsided!
That is plausible.
. Yes, the 50k could start out as deferred revenue, perhaps recognized for example, straight line over five years or in proportion to the sales performance obligation measurement each year.
. Or the contract was considered unlikely to yield high volumes over the course of the agreement (example: An application thought to be used in space travel or LEO satellite applications, such as the material version supporting low temp & radiation resistance application as was one example cited by their work with SiLorix, or not a large-scale foundry.
. A combination of both.
The big payday will be agreements with large-scale foundries, licensing and tech transfer agreements, or direct sales & manufacturing of our own modulators (example may be through agreements with contract manufacturers). I would love to see a tech transfer agreement with Intel get inked. It may do wonders for Intel's shareprice as well.
I blocked off and lost part of my post. ASC606 also requires you to match costs to produce against revenues, and determines in what situations you must defer revenue recording. For example a $50,000 upfront fee received by LWLG might be initially recorded as deferred revenue until portions of the contract obligations are fulfilled.
Here is a link that explains the basics of it: https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/asc-606/#ASC%20606%20Revenue%20Recognition%20Compliance
Launching an SEC investigation is like going to a drug-lord and complaining about all the drug dealers in the neighborhood.
Nice move. If we do not do a moonshot by year-end I will do the same the same thing in January. I already did my Roth conversions for this year, but getting awful close to having an opportunity to shift more from tax deferred to tax free early next year.
I liked the experience with M&A, and revenue accounting (ASC 606). ASC 606 regulations came in around 2018 to give more visibility to off-balance-sheet You would need this expertise when for example, when the amount of goo needed to fill a glass of wine may power thousands of devices. You need to develop those revenue vs "cost to produce" models into your reporting, which ultimately impact how your sales contracts will be written, with things such as tiered volume discounts, special foundry runs that bring premium pricing to the foundries, etc. They need this expertise to finalize their sales contracts, licensing & tech transfer agreements.
Controller will look at the Intellectual Property expense & the R&D costs that went into developing the various versions of Perkinamine. How do you capture & quantify those costs to take them against the revenue that is about to hit? This new hire will be helping in these areaa, and that expertise may be just what is needed to finalization commercial sales & licensing agreements.
This I believe is a very good sign.
That is almost as bad as getting your house TeePee'd with Toilet Paper. Pun intended
I believe that generative AI is obviously in it's infancy, and that associations made on keywords like Light Lightwaye, Logic unfortunately allow for the achievements or activity of one company to be attributed to another. This is coming from someone long the stock, but skeptical that these qualification milestones have been achieved with all the companies mentioned.
Do I hope I am wrong? Absolutely.
liamtoh, I do not recall ever seeing this in a news release. What is the source of this info? Did I miss seeing a public release on this qualification?
One small reason would be the silliness of calling it perkinamine, as if it should be trademarked for ongoing use. Get some marketing savvy and give the goo a name that is sensible and catchy.
it is a non issue since most likely a tech transfer agreements will rebrand it accordingly.
Very grateful to hear F2. I went to Israel last February with my wife and youngest daughter. So glad they are getting to safety.
KC, I have heard Dr. Lebby in public interviews saying that one of the great things about our EO Polymer is that it does not matter which direction the industry goes, that EO Polymer's may be used in either the pluggable or the co-packaged approach to improve performance and lower power. So if pluggables push back the need for co-packaged and we are in pluggables we are still there increasing our adoption to improve the pluggables, and my own words now: It is the improvements offered by our EO Polymer's that may even be the driving force that reduces the need for Co-Packaged optics. And we may also be the secret sauce that will be needed if a competition between the two approaches ensues. An analogy in the ring, woudl be like our EO Polymers are effectively the boxing gloves worn by both fighters.
His logic is simple - to twist and contort all TRUTH's in order to create Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt. TP in a nutshell. I would go one step further MarcoPolo by saying that No Engagement is a really nice approach. I have not read any of his posts and I still feel much more up-to-date on my investment by reading the posts of actual CONTRIBUTORS OF KNOWLEDGE.
Take that number of posts times the days in the months, times the six months to eight months or more I have had TP on ignore, and then consider how short life truly is, and you should understand why I put TP on ignore. Life is a Blessing not to be wasted. I already know he is a crafty liar, as was the serpent in the garden of Eden. Once I determined that I ejected him from my life. Life is Good.
Take that number of posts times the days in the months, times the six months to eight months or more I have had TP on ignore, and then consider how short life truly is, and you should understand why I put TP on ignore. Life is a Blessing not to be wasted. I already know he is a crafty liar, as was the serpent in the garden of Eden. Once I determined that I ejected him from my life. Life is Good.
What I like to see from an investor in pre-revenue tech is that we are creating intellectual property on the bleeding edge.
In the case of the ALD process, it is great that we were able to obtain the IP, so it is essentially vertical integration. If there is a competing EO Polymer out there, they may still have to come through the LWLG tollway booth. That could also apply to any companies coming out with direct drive, time will tell. These things do not often get sorted until there is commercial activity from someone utilizing your IP.
Knowing we are at the forefront of commercialization, filing patents, with a respected industry leader in this field, and a prolific inventor himself is a fine place for my investment and i have the patience to watch it play out.
The activity and industry papers with Polariton & Silorix is good for me. In Polariton we have our EO Polymer's in use in products with full datasheets undergoing commercialization, and with record-breaking speeds.
Not giving up my shares to anyone and plan to accumulate as I can.
He will do one of two things with your work. 1. Ignore it 2. Twist & Contort it.
Not I, said the weasel
Rkf as been targeted for longer then that, the guy was doing time in IHUB prison for months. Someone should put TP in the slammer for all the lies and mi-information if we are going to have equal justice.
Could also mean that say in the case of Global Foundries (and say our tech is involved), working as foundry to supply other partners, that LWLG gets material sales from the foundry:
From there you have scenarios such as:
GF has their own design that uses perk that uses none of LWLG designs, possible still requires a royalty depending on IP needed to produce.
GF is producing one of LWLGs designs, such as slot modulator, additional royalty in addition to material sales based on use of LWLG slot modulator design
GF is producing for a partner in the GF Fotonics alliance who perhaps must license with LWLG (a follow-on licensee) & same scenarios, brings their own design or uses LWLG design.
There are many possibilities.
Did I read somewhere that the royalty was based upon Gross Sales? I think so, doesn't that mean that we would benefit from special runs that are higher margin for the foundry - that by our licensing based upon gross sales we are not leaving money on the table that we should share in....pretty sure I read based on gross sales, yet noone has mentioned the implications to my knowledge.
That also means that words spoken at the ASM that they were not going to leave money on the table now has legal precedence in their first commercial contract.
Also keeping in mind with those counts that one previous lead transitioned to licensee coming out of the funnel as our first commercial deal.
You are spot on, Xena. His posts are nothing but purposeful FUD twisting the truth at all tims. I ignored him long ago.
isn't Claudia's specialty from Polariton laser characterisation? Hmmm. Why not join forces?
While i am excited to see the >9k hrs photostability results alone, the following make this well worth the wait and investment risk for me:
>110 Ghz, plasmonic 250
both pluggable & non-pluggable
both 1310 &1550, implying thermal stability
roadmap beyond 3200
Direct drive
We can already add materials in the line-up conducive to deep space conditions, leo satellite, military missile guidance, and in general plolymers not impacted by radiation.
From a TAM perspective ther are no limits, so it is all about acceptance, adotion, mass produceable, and as it rolls the throttle will be wide open.
I believe some advancements applicable to OLED rollout will speed the rollout ramp up for polymers.
Summary: Once in a lifetime investment opportunity.
Yep, also still waiting on MVIS.
2 cents lost his voice due to inflation
Tell that to doctors Irwin Jacobs (QCOM) or Steve Abramson(?)(OLED) LOL
Who in their right minds would sell at this point knowing conferences are coming up and we are getting recognition for hitting metrics records with Plasmonics. I was working for a tech company in St. Louis (Marryville Technology) when all the systems engineering guys were buying stock in the .50 to 1.50 range because they were a startup with a superior product. The company was FFIV. I am sure it made many of them very wealthy. We are about to disrupt an entire industry roadmap.
With the timeines given it seems well worth watching it play out for long investors.
Another one bites the dust. LK-99 is not a superconductor.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02585-7
Congrats on the jailbreak, RKF. I've been wanting to send you a cake with a hacksaw blade in it for awhile now.
This sums up the problem better than I could ever express on my own: