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 get it. Here we are success at hand, perhaps even arrived, and some people have to keep picking and picking at the scab of past frustrations. The train has left the station, we are moving forward.
Lighten up, you guys. No one has the inside track on how this is going to play out. Solar tech is extrapolating from the facts as he sees them. We don't know that his facts are incorrect.
Without having met him that is my sense of who he is -- he all about building value the hard way, no cutting corners. It seems like all this talk of R/S is off base. With all the hints of what's to come we may blow right by any situation that would suggest a need for it. Especially as we start to build a track record of success and revenue and people start to realize dots are the future and something they want to be part of. Right now it is all about overcoming the caution and fear of the unknown of people on the sidelines.
Austin Investor,
I agree and I think it even goes further than that. I thought when investors stepped up to add their shares to the tally in opposition to the internal take over attempt that that resulted in some kind of quid pro quo understanding that in return small investors would be protected and never again need to worry about dilution of share value from a reverse stock split. Somehow I got the idea Steve was on board with that.
Aside from that, I think talk of a reverse stock split is terrible optics at a time we trying to attract interest and new investors.
I personally would view it as a betrayal of trust if there were to be a reverse stock split I thought we were committed to growing value organically based on the technology, inspiration and vision we all believe in.
My image of you is like 35.
Solartech, my friend offered the following on your dire projection for our global future:
I think your's is an interesting story and has many compelling elements. The optimist in me, however, wonders about the unexpected role of ingenuity in this possible future.
Another way to ground-truth the possibility of your narrative is to look back in history at previous reversals in the cost of cash:
Looking over centuries, it seems that the rate trend made a similar long-term change in the late 1730s, late 1890's, and late 1940's (see chart below from https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-5000-years-of-interest-rates-history-2016-6).
Wikipedia has a section on notable events of the 1730s. Aside from some political jockying in Crimea, South Carolina, and Spain, the only major war was the Austro-Russo-Turkish War, which concluded in 1739. Otherwise, things seemed rather upbeat and discovery-oriented. But maybe it takes a while for turning of the cash tap to come to effect and cause panic. Maybe there is more evidence of this in the 1740s. I didn't look into the late 1890s and 1940s. I recall, roughly, that these and the following decades were some of the best in the history of the world, at least for the winner's of the preceding wars.
But with much of the globalization fruit already consumed and baked in, it does seem that things could be different this time. Much of the effect of cheap cash in the past must have been the aquisition of new methods and routes of exploitation to the cash-funded explorers and developers of the time. Although there is always room for improvement and further explotation at any point, it seems that much of this opportunity has been used up. This would suggest that the products of our most recent bout of cheap cash may not have created as much new real productivity.
Wow, my hat is off to you, Mr. Rodman. Nicely done!
Go Dawgs!
Speaking for myself, i trust Steve's veracity and his credibility. He said he has a firm working on them, and to expect them in a big bunch. As far as I can tell, this guy is the real deal. The quality and integrity of everything he does is astounding. This is big science, challenging technology, and audacious business model. All of this is what antiqued us and made us want to be a part of it. We are on the cutting edge and it is a fun place to be.
Yes, I can live with that. I meant diluted by a reverse stock split, or what we were talking about when Jamis intervened, the authorization of a special class of shares that give certain insiders special rights and advantages, potentially as a precursor to a take-over.
What you are talking about is almost a tautology. Certainly as more shares are issued there will be a diminishing of value for everyone. Until the time money is made and the size of the pie starts to increase for everyone.
It is a terrible feeling to have your shares taken away from you in a reverse stock split. What you describe is different from that. We all knew what we were buying into -- the future value of a company that had yet to market its dots. Steve has made the strategic decision to use shares to stay afloat rather than take on debt, which I think most of us applaud. What would be your solution, BigE, for staying afloat?
Thank you for what you did to save us, Jamis, I appreciate it. I contributed my share count to the total in opposition to an internal take over. I think events that have transpired since support your reading of the situation. My worst fear when I bought into this was a reverse stock split, and with Steve back it never even crosses my mind that our share count will ever be diluted.
Looks like we won.
A restraining order or protective order is an order used by a court to protect a person, business, company, establishment, or entity, and the general public, in a situation involving alleged domestic violence, harassment, stalking, or sexual assault.
There are several types of orders that are designed to prevent contact between two people. Contact can refer to personal contact, phone contact, texting, emailing, facebooking, communication through a third party or even remaining within a certain distance of someone’s school, home or workplace.
Although people commonly refer to all orders preventing contact as restraining orders, the type of order that is issued will depend upon who initiates the order as well as the relationship between the accuser and the accused.
Jamis is right. Apple was always discussed as a bonus play, something to dream about, and something for the future.
This is a great time to be averaging down.
I bought some more today.
Can we infer anything from this?
.048, but that sounds like bragging.
I have friends that are buying in small lots. One friend just bought 2,000 shares for his 12 year old daughter's account. Something long term she can watch grow. It has already gone up ten percent. He himself has been adding in small increments. I don't know what you consider small. I just bought another 100K shares. Not a big deal.
Yes, Thank you.
Why bother?
Except that they are not backing down, particularly with the predatory lenders. If there was a "problem" you wouldn't expect to see them so aggressively fending off barbarians at the gate. They are fighting at every step to maintain the status quo. If you take what Steve and company report at face value, then you have to feel pretty good about our prospects. If you see Steve and his veracity as the problem, then that is a different story. That doesn't leave you with much reason to stay with it. I just added more shares last week.
ululate, what an interesting word. Never seen that before. As in, a lot of ululating going on around here.
Legal Definition of "Motion to Stay"
A stay is a suspension of a case or a suspension of a particular proceeding within a case. A judge may grant a stay on the motion of a party to the case or issue a stay sua sponte, without the request of a party. Courts will grant a stay in a case when it is necessary to secure the rights of a party.
E*Trade also
Apple Is Secretly Developing Its Own Screens for the First Time
By Mark Gurman
March 18, 2018, 6:00 PM PDT Updated on March 18, 2018, 6:11 PM PDT
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-19/apple-is-said-to-develop-displays-to-replace-samsung-screens
I got quite a reaction from folks when I said a few days ago QMC is a safe investment (despite the OTC optics). For what it’s worth, I thought I would elaborate on what I meant, how I see the moving parts fitting together. This is based on my experience building a university institute, several private companies, and creating and managing government laboratory programs.
I find myself focusing on three sets of variables that figure prominently in whether a company prospers or fails:
Management — vision, quality, honesty, capability, and ability to attract capable and talented staff
Structural framework — science and technology, IP, organization, product/services, market/clients, price-point/profit margin
Process and context — revenue and cash flow, sufficient to preclude bankruptcy, pay bills, sustain workforce; legal challenges, assaults and threats; favorable regulatory environment; competitive advantage.
Of the above, by far the greatest variability, risk and unknown is management — its skills, integrity and capacity (short of a fundamental shift in market). If something is going to upend a company, at least near term during start-up, it is probably in this set of variables. Everything else is more or less pre-set as a design parameter or can be effectively managed.
I am sure there are other variables people can point to at varying degrees of refinement. The point is when I look at key variables pertaining to QMC, I don’t see anything that is going to leap up and grab us. We know the structural framework is remarkable, like once in a generation. With Sri gone (specifically his evident greed) management may be considered a strength, specifically the integrity, quality, ability and honesty of Stephen Squires. He holds shareholders in high regard, he wants to do right by us and is not going to dilute our shares. He has attracted first class scientific and technical talent. We are well on the way to putting the predatory lenders behind us, and they probably were not an existential threat, though potentially serious.
If you are going to point to a QMC vulnerability, it is probably cash flow and whether we have sufficient funds to stay afloat while we capitalize on delivery of quantum dots to markets. I think we are well beyond the point (if there ever was one in Steve’s mind) where Steve would sacrifice our future for sake of cash flow. If we are short of operating capital he will find it without giving away the store. By now this is probably not even be an issue.
I personally don’t see anything to worry about. All I see is incredible upside, sufficient to continue to be patient, however difficult that is.
This stock is down a bit, sure, but for someone who is long term, this has to be one of the most risk-free investments you could make. There is literally no down side or risk of loss. Sounds crazy if you only look at the OTC/price optics, but for someone looking inside the data, like we all are, this is where you want your money. There is no other way to look at it or we would all be gone.
That is good to hear. I hadn't realized the absence of information was divorced from the court cases. In fact that is a sigh of relief.
I guess the question is how long will Steve stay the course of not releasing any information until the court case(s) are settled or resolved?
That is how I see it.
I believe they are still pushing ahead with their business model. They are just not reporting. No one has said a thing about the business coming to a stop.
Keep in mind that Hookum has increased his stake to a million shares. Many of us are in the upper six figures if not a million or more shares. A lot of people believe in the potential of this company and are willing to stick it out.
Clear Sudden, what do you have to say? Was your post real?
No one has mentioned what Clear Sudden reported this morning. I have been upbeat all day since reading it. This is the affirmation we were looking for.
Qd i called the company and they said
Their server keeps crashing because of all the orders they keep getting.
They are waiting to find a computer on Craigslist so they can replace the one Stevie had in his garage.
I am more on the side of Solar Express. There is more reason for optimism than not in reading the tea leaves of what's going on behind the scenes. Taking what Steve has said at face value, that the absence of financials is linked to the predatory lender, that only makes sense if there is actually revenue, and in amounts sufficient to make a difference. Same with the announcement of a contract. And you have to think the OTC would not cut them the slack it is in reporting if it wasn't legitimate.
Steve himself in his Oct update attributed the late filing to the actions of a predatory lender:
In closing I realize that the late filing of our 10K may have caused some concerns. This late filing enhanced the company’s ability to deal with the actions of a lender, that in spite of being paid on time has chosen to take predatory actions. We will be filing the 10K within the allotted grace period and will make every effort to communicate more on this topic as appropriate.
The direct link has always been a bit of a mystery to me. The best explanation I've heard is if the filing shows income, it will increase the leverage of the lender, ostensibly because it will give them more incentive to press their case? Seems like they are doing that anyway, and the matter was always destined to come down to the legal merits, as we are seeing.
We then concluded that the legal suit will not deter a "big announcement" by an OEM. A contract announcement, for instance, from an OEM will occur on their timeframe and at their prerogative. We also concluded that when all is said and done, the share dilution, if it were to occur, would not be a big deal. This all makes the lawsuit seem rather inconsequential.
Now we are edging up to the idea that the delay is not about the actions of a predatory lender, but inaccuracies in the previous filing.
To me, whatever the log jam, the issues will soon be cleared up and we will start seeing evidence of income, either from the filings or announcement of a contract. The logic of how the moving parts come together has always seemed a little unclear.
RPR, I for one want to thank Sunyn for taking the initiative to visit Star Park and then share what he heard with the rest of us. That is a lot of effort, especially in the detail he conveyed. And he brought a lot personally to the conversation. We need every piece of intelligence we can get. It was obviously honest and true and undertaken in good faith. There is no blame whatsoever. It is up to each of us to process available information according to our own tolerance for risk and interrogation of evidence and facts. It is on us, no one else, to stay or walk away.
Nothing is that black or white, and motivations shouldn't even enter the picture. The baseline assumption must be that principals are acting in good faith. Any number of issues could have pre-empted what was the best thinking at the time, and no one said the announcement was timed to coincide with CES. We still have half a month in front of us even assuming January is still in play.
Why so glum? We'll get there. Only a matter of time, soon perhaps.
Happy Holidays to everyone.