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.
I don't know much about how this ASTM standard fits or doesn't fit in with what Sigma is doing. That's one reason I would like to get my hands on that Wohler's Associates 2014 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing State of the Industry report, on the off chance that it is discussed. The price is a bit out of my range, though ($495 or about 4,125 shares of SGLB).
As most here know, Sigma is well positioned with NIST:
https://3dprintingstocks.com/sigma-labs-sglb-wins-part-7-5m-nist-grant/
After doing some more searching, JJ comes through again (this also mentions Wohler's Associates, which is why we need to find someone with access to the 2014 Industry Report):
http://sigmalabs3dam.blogspot.com/2013/11/sigma-labs-will-globalize-3d-printing_13.html
For those interested, Chris Witty got back to me regarding the following:
Me:
As stated earlier by Jackle, I think they have protected themselves to some degree with having multiple JTDAs associated with different components of PR3D as well as the patents and trade secrets. Beyond that I don't know enough about takeovers to comment much further. Nedstarks post (21758) brings up the question why don't we have anti-takeover provisions in our bylaws? And do Mark and Vivek, whose recent backgrounds are exclusively with LANL and small companies (Sigma Labs and Vivek has a current side gig with Northern New Hampshire Technical Associates} for the last 17 and 15 years, respectively, want to join the bureaucracy of a major aerospace firm? Who knows.
On a side note, does anyone know much about Northern New Hampshire Technical Associates? Vivek Dave is the only person listed on their web page.
Great post, and I think you've hit the nail right on the head. They have indeed protected themselves with different major players involved with different components of what make up PR3D. Plus having that connection and access to LANL personnel, and R&D is huge and almost an unfair advantage, but obviously in a good way for us. In my opinion that is why all the competitors have essentially camera/optical based systems, while Sigma Labs has the trio, (optical, thermal & acoustic) with years of materials science to back it up.
Anybody in the industry, or with $495 burning a whole in the pocket, have access to this 2014 Wohlers Associates report:
3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing
State of the Industry
Annual Worldwide Progress Report
ISBN 978-0-9913332-0-2
http://www.wohlersassociates.com/
Would be interesting to see what is mentioned regarding industry standards (NIST, ASTM, etc.) and QA procedures.
Even though my direct interaction with Mr. Witty, up to this point, has been less than productive, I think it is an overall positive move by Sigma to hire a firm to better disseminate information about the company.
#1 Please learn how to carefully read the posts that you are commenting on.
#2 No one is harassing anyone on Linkedin. Looking at their profile is not harassing them. I and no one else I know are sending them emails or asking them to link to us.
#3 I have sent a grand total of two emails to Sigma Labs, one to Mark Cola about a month and a half ago, when I was told that he was dealing with investor's questions, and one to the new IR rep, whose job it is to answer investors questions.
#4 Please get a clue.
Stockmama,
Yeah on a positive note he did get back to me in a timely manner each time, unfortunately though with cryptic responses.
So this is what I just sent him. I have never been accused of being tactful, but I'm trying to push for an answer in a nice way.
Chris,
Thanks for the information, but can you provide anymore details, regarding my specific questions mentioned in my earlier email (Can you share the job titles of the full and part time positions currently employed with Sigma Labs. I'm particularly interested in the 3 new employee titles.). I don't want or need the employee's names, I would just like to know the job titles. Some of this is public information on Sigma Lab's Linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=133808728&authType=OPENLINK&authToken=red1&locale=en_US&srchid=780934331408383826191&srchindex=3&srchtotal=5&trk=vsrp_people_res_name&trkInfo=VSRPsearchId%3A780934331408383826191%2CVSRPtargetId%3A133808728%2CVSRPcmpt%3Aprimary
If you are not allowed to provide this information, then please state that also. Thanks in advance.
Yeah, perhaps but isn't it his job to find out and if they can't disclose it, then just say that. I will follow up with Mr. Witty a bit more aggressively and see where that gets me.
Yeah, I don't know if he's being super careful on what he says, because he doesn't fully understand what he can and can't say. What do you think of this reply from me:
Is there a reason you can't provide specifics regarding the questions I have asked? Some of this is public knowledge from Sigma Lab's Linkedin page.
So SGLB's investor relations rep: Chris Witty got back to me. Here are the emails:
Me:
Regarding the dots.
The dot connecting is based on available information that is out there, researched by many knowledgeable investors here, and is always backed up with links and references, so it is not just people spouting opinions. Here are some recent dots that help me sleep well at night (I'm not going to include links, but if you search this board, all of the following are documented from reliable outside sources):
SGLB hired 3 new employees in July 2014, an Electrical Engineer, and likely a Lead Software Engineer and a Business Development Manager (these two positions were advertised on Linkedin and I'm waiting for the SGLB's Investor Relations rep to confirm this). If it is indeed a BDM was hired, that would coincide well plans to commercialize by the EOY.
Honeywell/DARPA's AM efforts are going very well and are ahead of schedule.
GE Aviation AM efforts are ramping up big time and GE mentions SGLB by name in presentations and on conference calls.
From the 10Q: "We expect that our continued development of our IPQA® technology will enable us to begin commercializing this technology in the remainder of 2014 for the AM metal market."
SGLB has purchased a $750K state of the art metal printer from EOS
"We expect that the EOS M290 will allow Sigma to enhance its product offerings with respect to its current PrintRite3D suite of technologies, as well as permit Sigma to provide rapid prototyping and small lot production services to its current and future AM aerospace customers."
And sure there is a chance that Printrite3D does not pan out like we would all like. But if that were the case, why are we hearing good things from GE & Honeywell, they are in hiring mode, stating that commercialization will happen this year and investing in the 3d printer. At this time the dots are all we have, as well as some knowledgeable people here who are in aerospace, have spouses in aerospace, and/or have a in depth understanding of SGLB. Embrace the dots.
Also searching "Linkedin and Sigma Labs" shows they were looking for a Lead Software Engineer in Feb 2014 and a Business Development Manager in June 2014, so maybe those are the two other hires. Business Development Manager has a real nice ring to it, and very necessary for a small company on the verge of commercialization.
Yeah, you're right, I forgot about him. Post #20489 has good info about him.
Hopefully we'll know about the current and new employees soon as Mr. Witty got back to me with the following:
Yesterday afternoon I emailed the following to Chris Witty, the new Investor Relations rep.
Whenever I read a Really Fricking Boring post I never see any facts, any links, but it does take a lot of creativity to cut and paste, the disclaimer language that is in every financial statement, in an attempt to try and scare people.
Stocker was correct.
The M 400 is for larger parts and has been out since 2013
http://www.eos.info/press/press_releases/2013euromold_m400
The M 290 is an improvement over the M 280 and just came out:
http://www.mmsonline.com/products/laser-sintering-system-builds-metal-parts
Regarding business incubation:
According to a study conducted by the University of Michigan and the National Business Incubation Association NBIA entitled Business Incubation Works, an amazing 87 percent of business-incubation graduates stay in business.
There have been some recent questions regarding Sigma Labs' facilities.
This is what I've found out:
Sigma Labs: 100 Cienega Suite C Santa Fe, NM 87501. There was some unconfirmed talk of them moving from this location.
B6Sigma (wholly owned subsidiary of Sigma Labs) is located at the Santa Fe Business Incubator 3900 Paseo del Sol Santa Fe, NM 87507
I wrote about this a coupe months ago:
This company is certainly no threat to Sigma Labs, but this does tend to confuse things a bit:
http://www.therecycler.com/posts/print-rite-launches-3d-printer-and-consumables/
Print-Rite is a company that manufactures knock-off toner cartridges, and looks like they're getting into the 3d printing of plastics. I'm glad Printrite3d is a registered trademark of SGLB.
This is Plasmo's system:
Actually Plasmo was not mentioned in JJ's Blog, based on what I could find. But he talks about competitors systems being all optical based. After looking at Plasmo's web page their systems also appear to be optical based, not optical, thermal and acoustic, like Sigma Labs
There are plenty of optical based process monitoring competitors (see JJ's blog), and this appears to be one of them. Read up at:
http://www.plasmo.at/site/en/produkte-english
My take is optical systems are fine for non critical parts, but for critical parts in jet engines, for example, you want and need a lot more data on the quality of the parts being produced.
Mduffy & Silversmith, thanks for your opinions/additional research on this. Always nice to have multiple sets of eyes looking at these things. I've spent another hour or so looking into ORNL and neutron inspection, as it relates to additive manufacturing. While I think this is something to keep our eye on in the future, there's nothing I came across to suggest that they are anywhere near commercialization of this. Actually the opposite appears to be true:
I, as I'm sure many others here, like to do periodic searches to scour for tidbits related to Sigma Labs.
GOOD NEWS
A Google search for 3D printing quality assurance, reveals that Sigma Labs is listed in 6 of the top 7 results (minus an HP advertisement). For a small company with no real marketing budget that is huge if you ask me. Not to mention the lack of other competitors being listed.
NOT SO GOOD NEWS
I'm hoping the following will not come to fruition for a long time. I also wonder how competitive things are between national labs. Surely the experts over at ORNL have heard of Sigma Labs.
http://www.ornl.gov/ornl/news/features/2013/3d-printing-rises-to-the-occasion ;
Sigma Labs - Honeywell - DARPA "...we are extremely pleased with the results..."
From the latest issue of Army Technology magazine:
http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/downloads/352196.pdf
This quote is from page 11 of the following article
Open Manufacturing: DARPA Seeks Advanced Manufacturing Standards
Me too, at least not yet.
Thanks for the info. Having an aerospace insider here benefits us all
From JJ's Blog
Thanks for the info., I did not realize that GE got certified to approve their own parts.
To me the liability issue still remains, however. They're taking a metal powder that is being melted/welded together into a 3 dimensional part, where failure conditions could potentially exist anywhere in that part. One simplistic analogy I use in my head is you bake a cake, and when you go to eat it there are pockets of dry mix here and there. Not a big deal for a cake, but a big deal for an aerospace component. And while post build inspection will give you failure rates, etc. in general it won't specifically tell you that fuel nozzle #19 installed in Leap engine #57 meets specification.
I'm kind of just talking out loud here, and realize I know just enough about this to be dangerous, but I can't imagine GE is going to gamble on this new technology, in critical components without knowing that the process of assembling each part went according to plan.
Another question I have is, say two of the 19 fuel nozzles on a Leap engine fail, is the engine fine, but just operating at a lower efficiency, or is that a potential catastrophe? I'm guessing it is the former.
Printrite can save time and money certainly but I think the liability issues are equally, if not more important. GE is not going to gamble on an inferior QA product for critical parts (fuel nozzles, etc.) in their new engines. And what about certification of the new engines (I must admit I know very little about this) are the FAA, NIST, etc. going to approve of a less stringent QA procedure on these parts?
Followers now at 422, I'm an example of someone who never paid attention to the "follow board" button.
Here are some links I haven't seen before:
I like this Lawrence Livermore National Lab site that has weekly summary of AM articles (Sigma Labs is mentioned):
https://manufacturing.llnl.gov/news/links
EOS is expanding and opening a new facility that can house an additional 300 workers. Got to make those printers for GE (I hope).
http://www.metal-powder.net/view/39434/eos-moves-into-new-technical-centre/
The significant history of Sigma Labs as it relates to IPQA, in one sentence:
Lomiko Metals gets a mention in this article:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2333275-3d-systems-3-d-printing-and-graphene-the-next-big-thing?v=1406128511
I love that quote, and yeah it is Warren Buffet. I will be using that again.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/616687-keep-all-your-eggs-in-one-basket-but-watch-that
That is pretty much what I'm doing with a fairly large chunk of $ I can afford to lose (I have a separate well diversified retirement plan). I'm 78% in SGLB and on many days I'm tempted to increase the %age.
Nice summary on what's going on with Honeywell and Darpa. I've never seen that July 10,2014 article on the Army.mil website before. That was only a couple weeks ago. Was that posted here before?
Thanks for the info., makes sense. Interesting that Sigma has Deform trademarked and Scientific Forming Technologies Corporation (SFTC) does not, and they're both software related to engineering metal parts.
Maybe we get some new eyes
Breakout Board: #36
Most Posted: #26
Most Read: #9
Trying to dig something up on Honeywell. This is the best I could find. Someone smarter than me chime in on any relevance to Sigma
Jobs posted on Honeywell's site:
Additive Manufacturing (AM) Engineer Metals
http://www.careersathoneywell.com/en/jobsearch/jobdescription.aspx?languageid=1&jobid=00251344
Under additional qualifications
Ability to develop in-process monitoring and feedback control in advanced processing equipment.
Additive Manufacturing
http://www.careersathoneywell.com/en/jobsearch/jobdescription.aspx?languageid=1&jobid=00243024
Expert knowledge of one or more of the following software packages: ThermoCalc, PrecipiCalc, JMatPro, SYSWELD, DEFORM. - See more at: http://www.careersathoneywell.com/en/jobsearch/jobdescription.aspx?languageid=1&jobid=00243024#sthash.RQmVo9eA.dpuf
I'm assuming these are active job opportunities since they're on Honeywell's site. Is that Sigma's DEFORM?