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.
Think about how investments in the LQMT partnership companies may or may not result in a single penny going to LQMT.
“LL will not sue EONTEC for non performance.”
Stated another way: LL will not sue LL for non performance.
And hand puppet TC will only do whatever he is directed to do. He won’t cross LL.
If LL ignores the PLA, TC will ask LL what to do next. LOL
Seriously, I believe that our only course of action will be a class action lawsuit.
It would be nice if the PLA said that LQMT is paid if Eontec manufactured components are sold on the US, but the PLA doesn’t state or require that. Instead, the PLA merely requires both parties to take actions necessary to ensure that their products aren’t sold in the other party’s exclusive territories. There are no penalties or enforcement mechanisms.
QUOTE: Eontec shall take such action and measures as shall be necessary to ensure that Eontec Licensed Products are not sold or resold in or into the LMT Exclusive Territory by Eontec or any other party in the chain of distribution (whether as a part of a finished product assembled or produced by a third party or otherwise) without first obtaining the prior written consent of LMT.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141240/000143774916027548/ex10-2.htm
I have no idea, but seeing as how this is the LQMT forum, and not the Eon/Yihao forum, I just assumed that the post concerned LQMT. Why else would it be posted here?
Great news. Perhaps we will get some confirmation from LQMT in the next quarterly report AND maybe some revenue. TWT
How does that protect his assets? If the CCP confiscates/nationalizes Eontec/Yihao the manufacturer supply agreement is worthless. They can dictate the terms for anything manufactured there because they know LQMT has no other manufacturer.
Nah, he’s a genius. He bought at $0.10 and sold on the news of Apple investing in LQMT. Instead of buying more on the Apple news, he sells at around $1.60. Then he buys back in at around $0.06 - pure genius.
It makes sense that Li has secret communications with him.
Completely agree. The share price says it all. We’ve gone from $0.06 to $0.09 in a mere 6 years under Li. At $0.005 increase per year, none of us will live long enough to see LQMT relisted.
Just once I’d like to be wrong when there is a prediction of an uptick.
I thought cats never believed what birds told them.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say.
“Company doesn’t coordinate pumps. Quite the opposite!”
The opposite? You mean the company coordinates dumps.
“EON investors asking link to APPLE, Li pointing to LQMT!”
That’s the funniest thing I’ve read here for quite some time. We have all the great publicly sourced DD which showed purported links to Apple via Eon/Yihao. Now Li, who is in the best position to know, points his Chinese investors to look at LQMT. It makes me question the prior DD.
Well said
But, for all we know, Apple might regret spending the $20 million. Apple isn’t infallible. I’m not stating that Apple regrets the investment, but, IMO, it isn’t reasonable to take Apple’s decision from 10 years ago as a basis for assuming that things a good today. The real question is whether Apple would make the same investment today. TWT.
With all of the staff reductions by Li, with whom would Apple consult? The custodian?
“Even more exciting rumors…” RUMORS!! That says enough.
My bad. Thanks for the correction. I understood Yihao to be and independent company that Li/Eontec invested in but didn’t legally control.
You have that much free time on your hands? LOL
But Li has over 400 million reasons to direct profits to LQMT …. yada, yada, ya
Some fools buy low, and think they’re geniuses because it doesn’t go lower.
Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good. Definitely true of me when I started buying Apple in the early 90s. When I started investing in LQMT, I should have known lightning rarely strikes twice at the same place.
And yet the conspiracy theories promoted by pumpers supposedly have facts? Not the ones I’m seeing here including the cut and past jobs from other sites.
“Good Things happen to those who know how to wait and who've been patiently waiting forever!!!”
I guess we now know how long we have to wait for LQMT to be good thing - FOREVER.
I’d laugh at the hubris of crowing about being in the green before closing, but I’m crying over yet another wasted bullshit day.
Another way to look at it:
LQMT is one of the few stocks that manages to trade sideways during a four year bull run.
And after all the bullshit hype, dots leading to nowhere, derailed trains, rockets that don’t ignite, etc.!
Abysmal and incompetent are also types of performance.
IMO everything you wrote is spot on. We can only hope that the old axiom regarding investments is correct - past performance may not be indicative of future performance - because management has done nothing but fail for the lifetime of LQMT.
IMO the issue isn’t as cut and dried as you and the others present it. According to Joshua, 106c isn’t patented and isn’t part of CIP. Therefore, IMO, CE parts made from 106c might not necessarily run afoul of the MTA.
However, looking at whether any purported hinge is made from 106c is only half of the analysis. You must also consider, how is the part manufactured. If the process of manufacturing a CE part infringes a CIP (US) patent, then the CE part cannot be imported into the US regardless of whether the part is made from 106c or any other material.
I believe that we don’t know with enough certainty to know whether Yihao processes infringe any US CIP patent. Consequently, we don’t know whether LQMT can or cannot import CE parts into the US.
Is that in our universe or some alternative reality?
“Tony is in to illuminate COI as CEO. This is a position that creates COI, board member doesn’t.”
Tony as CEO definitely helps ILLUMINATE Li’s CIOs. LOL. I am confused as to how Li’s position as COB doesn’t create COIs when you said that Li is running the ship. So, who is in charge?
“Tony is in because he has earned the trust and loyalty of Li.” That isn’t a fact. That is your opinion, or did Li convey that to you in a secret email?
“Tony was put in because of his financial wisdom, and law background.” In your opinion.
“These are real facts not the bullshit being spoon fed to investors.” Your so called facts contradict your previous statements and/or are merely opinions.
On the one hand, you infer that Li resigned as CEO (but kept his position as COB) to “illiminate” [sic] his conflict of interests.
On the other hand, Li is (according to you) “runs this ship and calls the shots.”
If Li is in charge (running the ship/calling the shots), then how has Li eliminated his COI?
Sounds to me that Li has set Tony up as the fall guy. (Don’t blame because all the profits go to Eontec/Yihao. Blame Tony. He negotiated the contracts.)
Yes, the best chance of success lies not with betting on Li, but betting with Li. If it were possible to invest in the maze as Li has done, instead of simply holding LQMT shares,then I’d feel much more confident in getting my money back out.
Remember Admin’s warning.
“Please do not refer to other posters as anything other than their chosen alias. This focuses your post on the other user and renders it off topic.”
Your point of view is so eloquently articulated that I must acknowledge the powerful persuasiveness of your argument.
Nah. Bullshit.
“All we need is a contract or sizable quarterly revenue increase to silence these people.”
And that has been true for the last 20+ years! It’s Groundhog Day
Would those facts include your statement “Last time LQMT posted about CE to SEC they said game ON” which is clearly false?
But you need to connect the tea leaves, read between the connections, and have private communications wit Li and Tony.
And, drink the Kool-Aid.
“Last time LQMT posted about CE to SEC they said game ON.
Show me different from that last EXPLICIT statement made about CE to SEC.”
The last SEC filing was the Quarterly Report, March 31, 2022.
The phrase “consumer electronic” appears twice and “non-consumer electronic” appears once. For your convenience, I have copied each instance below, BUT NOTHING SUPPORTS AN ASSERTION THAT THEY SAID “GAME ON”.
1) The Company’s revenues are derived from i) selling bulk Liquidmetal alloy products to customers who produce medical devices, automotive assemblies, sports and leisure goods, and non-consumer electronic devices, ii) selling tooling and prototype parts such as demonstration parts and test samples for customers with products in development, iii) product licensing and royalty revenue, and iv) research and development revenue. (Page 8)
2) On August 5, 2010, the Company entered into a license transaction with Apple Inc. (“Apple”) pursuant to which (i) the Company contributed substantially all of its intellectual property assets to a newly organized special-purpose, wholly-owned subsidiary, called Crucible Intellectual Property, LLC (“CIP”), (ii) CIP granted to Apple a perpetual, worldwide, exclusive license to commercialize such intellectual property in the field of consumer electronic products, as defined in the license agreement, in exchange for a one-time, upfront license fee, and (iii) CIP granted back to the Company a perpetual, worldwide, fully-paid, exclusive license to commercialize such intellectual property in all other fields of use. (Page 10)
3). On August 5, 2010, we entered into a license transaction with Apple pursuant to which (i) we contributed substantially all of our intellectual property assets to a newly organized special-purpose, wholly-owned subsidiary, called Crucible Intellectual Property, LLC (“CIP”), (ii) CIP granted to Apple a perpetual, worldwide, fully-paid, exclusive license to commercialize such intellectual property in the field of consumer electronic products, as defined in the license agreement, in exchange for a license fee, and (iii) CIP granted back to us a perpetual, worldwide, fully-paid, exclusive license to commercialize such intellectual property in all other fields of use. (Page 18)
NEWS FLASH. With the help of the latest (re-occurring) rumor - it wasn’t really a new rumor after all - LQMT went up $0.004! At $0.004/day, we will get to NASDAQ in another 977 trading days - so long as we always go up - or approximately 3.9 years.