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.
Helen was the name of the purported Yihao employee that allegedly confirmed Liquidmetal being used in the Apple Watch. I wonder if she exists. She didn’t reply to my inquiry.
I’m a believer in the science of amorphous metal but not a “believer” of the management of LQMT. I can see and quantify the technological benefits of amorphous metal, but I’ve only seen incompetence and dilution from multiple management teams (including Li).
LQMT isn’t a religion where faith and being a believer are necessary. It is an investment (or more accurately, for the last several years, a gamble).
“Well, with Tim Cook being the master logistics and supply chain CEO, he clearly would want a US supplier.”
Why is it clear that Cook/Apple would want a US supplier? Cook/Apple have been quite comfortable for many years having few/very few US suppliers.
Good luck to us all. I quit accumulating years ago and hold slightly more than half of your portfolio. If LQMT hits, it will supplement my retirement nicely. If not, oh well.
“LQMT is a Journey, not a Destination”
At best, LQMT is an investment not a philosophy. At worst, LQMT is a gamble.
TWT whether LQMT gets 20% in future cases or not. Contracts are open to re-negotiation especially when a party (Li) has so much influence.
Logic also dictates that we admit that Li can profit whether LQMT does or not.
Logic also dictates that Chinese companies aren’t free from Chinese government interference.
One has to be wearing blinders if they can’t see anything other than Li’s 410 million shares.
There isn’t anything better as far as I know, but you get what you pay for.
The issue isn’t revenue. The issue is profits. Even though profit without revenue is impossible, revenue through LQMT doesn’t guarantee profits for LQMT.
“I have thought that LQMT stock was a better store of value than a CD at the bank because CDs yield Butkus and the sky is literally the limit for LQMT stock share price appreciation potential.”
The same could be said of a lottery ticket.
“The fact that LQMT has survived for 20 years makes the "gamble" less "wild" in my eyes.”
But there has also been massive dilution over the last 20 years and brushes with bankruptcy.
IMO, LQMT is more of a gamble (lottery ticket) than an investment.
I think we all have. In all likelihood none of us manages a large hedge fund.
When our balance sheet and future contracts indicate that LQMT is a potential investment and not a wild gamble.
I agree that Eontec/Yihao are CMs of LQMT, but do the math and look at the players. There is nothing in the PLA stipulating royalties. That must be negotiated now. On one side of the table you TC (Li’s handpicked sock puppet) and on the other side you have Li (or someone else that Li has approved). No agreement is going to be reached without Li’s approval.
A customer agrees to pay X for 100,000 widgets, which may yield a profit of Y. The contract between LQMT and the CM will determine whether LQMT gets 99% of Y or 0.0000001% of Y or something in between. And, such a scenario is 100% within the PLA because that is the way Li wanted it when he signed the PLA.
There are three elephants in the room. One is Li’s 400+ million LQMT shares. Another is to what extent will his businesses in China influence his decisions. (Gotta love having a COB (and defacto CEO) with conflicts of interest. And, the third is to what extent will Li follow orders/suggestions/desires of the Chinese government.
The revenue may run through LQMT, but Li/TC will negotiate with the CM/Eontec/Yihao/Li on the cost for manufacturing. LQMT may get a reasonable royalty or virtually nothing. It is all speculation right now. TWT.
It is interesting - a 2d polymer stronger and lighter than steel. I’m hoping that the 2d constraint will eliminate it as a competitor to BMGs in many/most applications.
That speaks more as to how poorly LQMT communicated in the past than to how well they are currently doing it.
“IF A FOLDABLE SMARTPHONE HAS NO “GAPS”, IT USES HUAWEI’S PATENT
….
Since BB told us Huawei adopted LiquidMetal, it will be fair to say Honor and all future foldable vendors that has no GAP and crease free screen will have to adopt LiquidMetal.”
With regard to the first statement (no gaps, then must use Huawei’s patent), that was made by Yu Chengdong (a Huawei Executive). Not exactly an unbiased source. He must be very confident that no engineers in the entire world cannot design a non-infringing hinge that has no gap.
The second statement is a non sequitur. Just because Huawei used LiquidMetal, that doesn’t preclude other companies from using a different BMG. Maybe they will, or maybe they won’t. What is your basis for jumping to the conclusion that they must use Liquidmetal?
Or maybe he is using CIP technology and speculation to the contrary is wrong.
“So if IP shared with Apple in CIP is NOT used there is nothing binding Liquidmetal to a CE agreement with Apple.”
Very true, but if the maze isn’t using CIP technology, then Li must be kicking himself for investing in LQMT.
“…waiting for the bigger payday”
If this LQMT shareholders are waiting for a payday, then their shares are part of the market - just not at today’s valuation. They are part of the float. For no other company do shareholders define the float as being merely the shares that would be sold at a given price.
Thank you.
Kind of makes a person wonder why there was so much more activity in the years preceding Li.
“I’ve seen this stock trade over 100 million shares in one day.”
You said it, so go ahead and back it up. When did LQMT ever trade over 100 million shares in a day? What year? Did Li tell you about ii in a secret confidential telephone call or e-mail?
When was that? Which year?
When did 100+ million shares trade in a day?
Absolutely right. Virtually anything is possible . The SP could go between 0 to $3 or more. My point was that good news isn’t necessarily rocket us up to $3 because now we are much more diluted.
Or it maybe much less than $3 because of all of the share dilution since 2004.
No, but I split my time looking at this and AAPL. Started buying AAPL back in the 90s and LQMT in 2014. At one time I had hoped that LQMT would shine as brightly as AAPL.
If you want it higher, buy more shares.
“March will be huge!”
We definitely know that March is larger than February.
“I am sure he will be glad to answer your question then!”
If so, that will be the first time in several years that LQMT has answered questions (other than private communications with so called serious investors).
You may have fired the painter, but I wonder if tomorrow’s will follow instructions.
What would be even more useful is a pronouncement from our esteemed leader giving us an honest assessment of where we are and what to expect next.
Yes, pointing out the ethical weakness of our markets gives me reason to hope that Li will direct revenue to LQMT, and hopefully it will be of sufficient amount to get us relisted.
It is unethical for a person having a fiduciary duty to place their own interests ahead of those to whom the duty is owed.
If/When Li directs money to LQMT for the purpose of advancing his own interests, he will be acting unethically with regard to his Chinese investors. To act ethically, he will need to make certain that LQMT doesn’t get one penny more than it would have gotten if he didn’t have a conflict of interest (by owning shares of LQMT and the MAZE). Given the reasons for not directing money to LQMT in the previous post, the only reason to do so is because of Li’s self interest in LQMT. If he manages to act ethically, the amount of money directed to LQMT isn’t going to be significant enough to get LQMT relisted IMO.
IMO, the only justification for sending money our way is due to Li’s stake in LQMT. In short, we are relying on a man with divided loyalties (to his Chinese shareholders and American shareholders) to do what is in his best interest (at least as we understand it) and hope that we will benefit - or phrased another way, we hope to benefit from his unethical behavior.
“but if that were the case all the many accelerating 'connected dots' pointing to the opposite have to be totally discounted”
It seems as if the market has found those “connected dots” to be underwhelming and/or disconnected.
“Furthermore, it could take far longer than anyone anticipates to actually reach commercialization.”
Are you inferring that commercialization is after this coming March when we will finally hear from our newly appointed CEO?
There is a big difference between dynamite and LQMT. Dynamite you know will explode. LQMT you hope will one day explode.