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.
Watts, good call on your part as well, by pointing out the difference between the clamps and the matrix bands.
riese713, I have to retract what I wrote.
I was thinking of markups, and not about royalty fees or licensing fees. I have no idea how LMT determines what their fees will be. They do have actual production costs through VPC, but I do not know how they will charge for the IP component. That is above my pay grade.
Point well made. I agree completely.
Hey, don't feel bad. You did good... much better than most.
riese713, your revenue figures are way off.
You are figuring your "royalty" estimate on the basis of the price Garrison charges their customers for the device. You have to figure LMT's margin / markup on the price it costs LMT to produce the clamp: not on what Garrison charges. Garrison also uses other materials besides the spring to manufacture the clamp... and then they add on their own hefty markup when selling the clamps to their customers.
Ogawa's blog on the canard estimates the cost to manufacture a single canard at about $56.50. There is enough alloy in a single canard to manufacture at least several dozen dental clamps. So if we use a conservative figure of 1 canard = the same amount of alloy in 3 dozen spring clamps (and that ratio is probably even higher than I estimated), LMT's approximate cost per spring clamp is only about $1.50.
If LMT marks up each clamp by 10% (the industry "standard" you reference), they will receive revenues of 15 & 1/2 cents a clamp, or approximately $2.6 million a year on 17.5 million clamps.
I think LMT has a good chance of earning some real revenue this year, but nowhere along the lines you estimated... although I do like your numbers better than mine.
What's (or Watts) the difference between reading posts about Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc., and reading Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot?
The answer: While the theme is the same in both cases, Beckett is a better writer.
Sounds good to me.
I'll be sure to tell you what you want to know... but not until 2022, as per your request.
Watts, your skepticism is always well founded.
And after what we have both been through, I certainly take no issue with that. But it is so easy to push you buttons, and I was just having some fun. After all, 'tis the season to be Jolly!
You'd love to have my cost basis, and you know it.
Check your voice mail. Give me a call.
Best,
Your fellow Missourian (or should I say misery-an?)
I am not so sure that I would want to ask Liquidmetal to do my manufacturing since they still have the propensity to bolix anything they lay their hands on.
Ali, thanks for your reply. I did not intend to set you off, but I think I understand what you were trying to convey – but I'm not sure.
I suffered financially under the reign of the Kangs. So I am no fan of that regime. But as I see it, LMT is now a fundamentally different operation - with an entirely different business model - than it was under John Kang.
I take no issue with anyone who disagrees with my opinion, but those who disagree and also own stock in this company are either masochists or complete fools. Why anyone would own stock in a company in which they fundamentally mistrust the management defies comprehension.
How might that effect the future LQMT PPS (which is, after all, the only pertinent question)?
Any thoughts on that matter?
Your well taken point is hardly a rant. But let me ask you this:
1. Why would Engel publicize LMT's turnkey operation? If by some miracle, Steipp "sells" 10 Engel machines next year, it will represent only a tiny fraction of Engel's business. Engel's website accolades are reserved for its major corporate customers - not for tiny companies that have gone nowhere in 11 years but down.
2. If the turnkey proposal was just part of Steipp's imagination, and not a real viable 'solution,' why would VPC start legal action to block LMT from offering the turnkey 'solution?' Are you proposing the Visser is foolish enough to bite an un-baited hook? VPC's action is proof positive of the realistic nature of the 'turnkey solution.'
(And that's not just my opinion: that's a fact.)
That depends on how one keeps score.
It's obvious that the problem with you is that you actually expect to make money from your stock in this company. My purpose for owning shares is solely to promote a new, exciting, transformative technology. I don't care about profits.
I'd write more, but I can't get my entire arm out of my straight jacket so typing is difficult.
Anax, you are one of the very few posters on this forum who always has good information (which you always cite) and who remains level headed - neither pumping nor peeing on this company.
There are many other posters who should follow your lead instead of posting the junk they pass on as "information."
Thank you, Anax. I always look forward to reading your posts.
-L
This is the second CC that I couldn't get through to ask questions. The first time I assumed it was an error on my part. But this time I made no errors. I am angrier than a hornet's nest. I called Liolios and had to leave a G-D message because Boy Wonder who answers for LQMT wasn't available. If I have to contact the SEC, I will.
That was a public CC for a publicly owned company and there is no excuse for not allowing individual investors to ask questions, publicly, during a CC.
I am F'n ANGRY!
I called in, hit *1, and NEVER was acknowledged so I couldn't get my questions answered. This is BS and I'm not going to stand for this. I'm calling Liolios now and I want them to connect me to Tom Steipp.
ARRRRRGGGGGHHHH!!!!!
Can lqmt get $$ from alloy from mtrn for aapl products?
"As a part of the Certified Liquidmetal Partners Program, Materion will contribute alloy production technologies in partnership with Liquidmetal and other Certified Liquidmetal Partners to ensure that customers are provided consistently high quality products and support services.
What's with the 666 trades
Excellent question, Watts.
In the first place, I have not read the agreement between Swatch and LQMT - just the press release... which tells us next to nothing. However, since the MTA with Apple was signed in 2010 and the agreement with Swatch was signed in 2011, I am fairly certain that the lawyers for all parties knew about the MTA with Apple and did not violate the terms of that agreement. Had they done so, we all would have heard about it long ago. One - even one as powerful as LQMT - does not mess with Apple... unless they are Samsung and can pay off a Korean Judge.
From what I read and understand, Apple would not have to deal with Swatch in any way. An Apple "watch" will not be a "watch" in the conventional use of the word. It will be a "consumer electronic" device (as defined in the MTA) that is worn on the wrist like a watch, and it will tell time like a watch, but it is actually a mini-computer and not a watch.
For example, I can buy a wrist strap that will hold my iPhone on my wrist or on my arm. The iPhone does not then become a watch simply because it, too, tells time, and is worn on my wrist.
On Renewable Energy Products:
Sandy, you beat me to it. That was going to be my next post. As I read the following:
Renewable Energy Products" means components and devices used in systems designed primarily for the conversion, storage, or transport of any form of power, including but not limited to electrical, mechanical and chemical power, from renewable energy sources. As further clarification, Renewable Energy Products are products used in the conversion, storage and transportation function from renewable energy sources as opposed to inert components, such as a casings.
Watches are EXCLUDED in the MTA with Apple.
There does appear to be a conflict between Apple's use of liquidmetal and Swatch's use of liquidmetal for an electronic watch. I am not sure how this issue will be resolved, but I do know it is now a source of concern between the two companies.
2.2 Nonexclusive License Grant. Licensor [Crucible] grants to Licensee [LQMT] a fully paid-up, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide nonexclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses only to Apple, under the LMT Technology in the Nonexclusive Field, to use, reproduce, publish, display, distribute, perform, exploit and disclose the LMT Technology and to make and have made, assemble and have assembled, use, sell, offer to sell, import and offer to import, license and offer to license, distribute and offer to distribute, repair, reconstruct, practice, and maintain Specified Licensed Products, and perform any act or step that incorporates, utilizes, embodies or reflects, any inventions claimed in the LMT Technology in the Nonexclusive Field, including without limitation any such activities that would, absent a license, subject a person or other legal entity to a claim of direct infringement, contributory infringement, inducing infringement, or any other type of infringement. For purposes hereof, "Nonexclusive Field" means the worldwide industry for any of the following products to the extent that such products constitute Consumer Electronic Products: (i) Watches and Watch Components as well as (ii) Jewelry and components for Jewelry, and (iii) Renewable Energy Products. "Specified Licensed Products" means the following products using the Licensed Technology but only to the extent that any such product constitutes a Consumer Electronic Product: (i) Watches and Watch Components as well as (ii) Jewelry and components for Jewelry, and (iii) Renewable Energy Products. The term "Watch Components" includes all watches whether luxury or casual watches. For purposes hereof, the term "Jewelry" means rings, necklaces, pins, cufflinks, and other objects that are ornamental in nature and used for adornment of the human body. "Renewable Energy Products" means components and devices used in systems designed primarily for the conversion, storage, or transport of any form of power, including but not limited to electrical, mechanical and chemical power, from renewable energy sources. As further clarification, Renewable Energy Products are products used in the conversion, storage and transportation function from renewable energy sources as opposed to inert components, such as a casings.
Sandy, my date goal is March. The only thing I have to do now is to pick a year for that March goal. 2014? 2015? 2023?
Of all of you fine folks on this board, only Watts knows how many of my date goals have come and gone, and to no avail. Yet my hope remains, stronger than ever.
My shrink asked me if, instead of hope, wouldn't I rather have a profit? After thinking about that for a few minutes, I fired my shrink. What does he know about LQMT anyway?
Would love to know how they are getting around heat issues.
best fit for intended application doesn't point to lqmt for every part.
what's the rank of "weight" only of the following material for a same sized part:
Aluminum < Liquidmetal < Titantium < Iron ?
what's the rank of "weight" only of the following material for a same sized part:
Aluminum < Liquidmetal < Titantium < Iron ?
Am I on the right track here? Is this concept truly THAT BIG? Is this as important as the Li ion battery?
nobody is going to hit a home run with LQMT. If you bet the farm, that's an "all in strategy", you're gonna lose it based on the odds alone.
Is 690,900,090 going to be enough for you to retire?
Rule number one, don't fall in love with a stock.
Not sure I follow my logic either.
Guess I was trying to say that even though it is brittle, it does not shatter all that easily. I have a decent sized chuck of the stuff... whacked it with a hammer, and nothing happened to it. But I'm sure if I hit it hard enough, it would shatter.
The real point in all of this is that the alloys are already ready for prime time. And whether or not it will make a suitable cell phone case has no bearing on where LQMT is going with their alloys at this point in time.
Apple is another story... as made abundantly clear by Steipp... and another product line entirely. I really do not understand all of the posts here that try to tie in LQMT to cell phone cases.
Interesting take on the hardness issues, but you might want to research that a bit. In the first place, Steipp raised that issue himself and stated that the BMG alloys were not for every application.
Second, re-read the post about the experiment with the Liquidmetal case and note how difficult it was to fracture the material.
Drop an iPhone and chances are the glass case will crack. (It happened to me.) That will not happen with a Liquidmetal case.
In any case, I enjoyed your post and thank you for taking the time to present your concerns – all valid points.
Hats off to you, friend. That was one if the best posts I've read in a long time. Thank you for doing and for reporting your experiments.
Yes sir. The Low today was $.0791.
Let me repeat that: seven and ninety one hundredths of a penny.
But wait unti the end of the year, when pennies per share will be a fading memory.
Thank you Anax. Excellent analysis. Also appreciate the time you took to provide the links.
So let's see... yesterday's close was $.0880 and today's low,so far, is $.0870.
Can you imagine how wonderful a very old and rare Scotch tastes – especially when you don't have to pay for it?
I wish you guys would stop talking about LQMT short positions, because at only 5'8" I resemble that remark.
I hear you. Divorce can be VERY costly. That's why I have decided to keep both of my wives.
Pappy, it's my understanding that all patents registered to Crucible through the end of 2014 will belong to both LQMT and APPLE in perpetuity: regardless of whether the actual patents came for Apple or LQMT engineers and scientists. After 2014, if the agreement is not extended, new patents from LQMT will continue to be registered to CIP and will become the exclusive property of LQMT. Patents that come from APPLE, after 2014, will not be registered to CIP and will belong exclusively to Apple.
Intuitive Surgical is a stock that went from ~$20 at it's IPO (LQMT was $15) in 2000 to it's current trading range in the high $400s. It was never close to being a penny stock. Its low was about $11. It remained in the ~$20 range for its first 5 years, then went from the $20s to ~ $100 in about 18 months.
LQMT and ISRG are not really comparable for many reasons, but LORTAP KCOTS makes a very valid point about the bashing of the two companies on message boards - especially the bashing of the CEO at ISGR and the bashing Tom Steipp. And I agree with LORTAP that LQMT will prove to be a very valuable company in spite of all the bashing.
There are always disgruntled people who frequent these message boards to vent their anger and frustrations with life in general. We should be charitable towards them, be happy they have a harmless way to vent, and pay iHub's small fee for the privilege of using the Ignore feature liberally. It greatly enhances the positive experience of being a member of this forum.