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.
Look into what Michael Saylor has done with MSTR.
"New technologies fail until they don't." -Michael Saylor
Think it will test ~1.16? Is that what I'm seeing?
It's the same reason Li wanted the proper name Liquidmetal as opposed to the other alternatives...amorphous is too scientific and bulk metallic glass implies fragility.
We love you Base!
What are the short/long term implications of price closing above 610 dma? Thanks!
me either....got out a while back. my guess is uptick in camper sales due to pandemic
Indeed, Thank you Base.
Would love to hear your thoughts if we close above the 200dma!
yes, doesn't take long in full sun exposure
What are the pros/cons of purchasing shares here instead of purchasing BTC on an exchange such as Kraken? TIA
It appears they are following through with their acquisition/growth plan. The stock seems to be flying under the radar when it comes to attracting investors.
is this not from aug 2018?
Only us.
Remember Flubberfools from the yahoo board? That guy was brilliant.
Thanks. Do smart phones have to utilize bmg rf transparency to access the 5g network, or is it only that bmg would be the most ideal?
NOTHING BEFORE NASDAQ
Yes, Liquidmetal is the best branding of the material for the masses. Anything mentioning glass implies fragility.
I stand with Gorgol on this one.
probably iateclube or eagle1947
Li has mentioned the value of the Liquidmetal name. From a marketing standpoint, I would argue there is no better name to introduce the material to the masses. Bulk metallic "glass" implies fragility. "Amorphous" is simply not as catchy. I find it hard to believe that Apple can come up with any better description. Perhaps Li agrees, and predicts (or knows) Apple will use the Liquidmetal name. Only a theory.
Pirsig reconciles this duality with a concept he calls Metaphysics of Quality. Let's hope Li sees to the "quality" of our investment.
what kind of revenue figures do we need to see to get the share price up to Nasdaq standards without a reverse split?
Right, it was implied that the RFQs were cost prohibitive via injection molding and would be revisited now considering the die cast capabilities of Eontec. Soooooooo, if a customer bites on the more cost effective Eontec diecast method, using Li's formula, what does that mean for LQMT in terms of revenue?
That run occurred just before the announcement of the hiring of Paul Hauck, FWIW
.33 right here
Forgive me for being obtuse, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this translation....would you mind explaining what you're taking away from this q and a? Thanks for posting
Meaningless.
Damn it feels good to be a young man in a young man's stock.
Can anyone on the board present a strong, reasonable argument AGAINST the Li deal at this point?
Lots of confirmation bias on this board, bearish and bullish.
Absolutely. I assume they have more than a self-serving reason (which makes an a** out of me at least.)
I'm a bit puzzled that a successful, legitimate Austrian company with a stellar reputation would showcase a partnership with a 2-bit shell American scam operation that will be closing its doors in June.
Yes, the sensor photo has been around for years, i recall the great Watts-dini used it as his avatar some time ago. safe to assume it was die-cast?
Well, there you have it. Thanks. It does seem odd that such a credible source would mistake bmg for something as common as stainless steel. It also seems odd that he would merely be passing along rumors. Makes you wonder why he stated the logo was bmg in the original article...
Also, assuming the iPhone 6/6s logo is not BMG, what other material might it be? Forgive my ignorance, I'm not familiar with the material sciences.
Well, he either realized the original article was inaccurate, or he was forced to revise it. I would argue for the latter. It would stand to reason that someone in his position would not be inclined to speculate without hard facts, but who knows?