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.
What is the posner effect? The Steven Posner Trust that is listed as beneficial owner in the 10-K?
I'm sure you are right. Notwithstanding, it seems pretty clear that it's a development deal at this point.
My take on the PR is that the $1M is to work with them to develop a product that incorporates QDs - not to sell them QDs. I don't get the sense that Freschfield currently uses QDs.
From the PR:
I haven't seen anything that says Freschfield has done any work on a QD-based product as of today?
Is there any QD-based solar panel in production today?
They filed the $9.75M docs back in November. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1403570/000149315216014713/ex10-1.htm
I don't know if it's dead or not, but it would seem to be. Besides, why would they have set up the $5M if the $9.75 was still alive?
They never filed a registration statement which was required by 12/31/16, and they're passed the 3/31/17 drop-dead commencement date.
It looks like they let the $9.75M deal die? I can't imagine why. It was priced a lot better than the $5M deal.
No, the 3X reserve does not apply to the Put Shares, just the Underlying Shares. The Underlying Shares are related to the convertible promissory notes. There is a reserve multiple on those shares because the conversion rate can change or something like that.
The Put Shares are the shares they are actually selling to raise the $5M. There would be no reason for them to reserve more than the maximum they can sell. That's all they can sell no matter what.
The "Underlying Shares" and the "Put Shares" are two separate things. The Put Shares are the shares they sell to the ELOC Investors to raise the $5M.
Nope, just 41.7M. The 300% reserve does not apply to those shares.
No, I have a good sense of humor. Trying to turn a $1M collaboration agreement into a $1.6B contract is funny ;)
What do you think would be the SP if they landed a contract that required 5 more reactors let alone 10. That's 10MT in addition the the 2 they have. I think that's more capacity than exists in the world today. They won't need 150M shares to fund that. It's the scenario where nothing happens where they may need the shares.
I keep seeing people post that authorized doesn't mean issued shares. While true in theory, it's not been this company's track record. If anything it's the opposite. Isn't the AS 85-100M in the negative right now?
Yes, it said they were paying QTMM $1M over the next year for "collaboration" to "to integrate Quantum Materials Corp advanced Nanomaterials including quantum dot-based solar photovoltaics into Freschfield's SmartSkinz." I didn't see anything that suggested QDs were going into products to be sold this year or that they need QDs to make their current product work. My read is that they hope they can use QDs to make future product better.
Don't get me wrong. I think this is great, but it is what it is, and it's not a supply contract.
Did you read the post at all? Jamis said QTMM needed funding for several years not me.
You don't think the $1.6B involves QTMM QDs do you?
So you think that this company is going to need to be funded for a couple more years? And you are excited about it???
You might have just as well said it another way - they forced it down our throats, bend over and take it whether you like it or not. I guess I have to vote "yes," but I'll leave the "hell yes" vote to the folks who like getting bent over.
You would think the writer understands the difference. It's a press release written by the company.
Do you want them making an acquisition with $0.13 shares? If the share price is a little higher, they can put shares to the equity line and pay off the notes freeing up the reserve, and then they have shares for an acquisition without extra authorized.
Ted, thanks for the response. I can only see 480M in the 8-K, but let's call it 500M. Add 42M for the put reserve 51M for the 3X reserve on the default rate, and 15M additional for the 2016 Debentures, and you are at 608M. I'm ignoring the failure to reserve default as this precludes it. Round it way up to 650M which gives the company somewhere between 40-60M cushion, and any way you slice it, there is at least 100M more shares than they need.
If it took 3 years to go from 200M to 400M, all the more reason not to increase it by 350M today when there is no reason to do so. Why should shareholders hand over that kind of power for no reason? "We as shareholders can only guess" is not a good reason.
A/S vs. O/S is more of a distinction than a difference. With the stroke of a pen O/S can equal A/S, and there is nothing we can do about it. By your logic, why not increase it to 1B? or 2B for that matter. The real difference - the one that matters - is between O/S and N/A. That's what keeps shareholders relevant.
Thats a couple million shares at most maybe? Why would the existing management get more options??? It looks like 600M is still the right number and 750M is at least 150M more shares than they need. I don't understand how anyone is OK with increasing to 750M?
Per my earlier post, here is everything I found in the last 10-Q:
Issued and Outstanding 337,105,438
Sep 2014 Debentures 167,000
Jan 2015 Debentures 8,333,333
Apr-Jun 2016 Debentures 13,875,000
Sep 2016 Debentures 833,333
Nov 2016 Debentures 1,666,667
Warrants 31,914,784
Options 74,775,248
Restricted Stock 500,000
Subsequent Events 10,983,259
Total 480,154,063
According to the 8-K, the $5M Equity Purchase Agreement has a minimum price of $0.12, Ex 10.1 Section 6.1 says they only have to reserve 100% for the put shares, so that's a maximum of 41.7M shares. With a 750M authorized, this leaves 228.2M. There are other things in the 8-K they need shares for, and I have not looked at it in detail, but it's hard to imagine it's anywhere near 228.2M.
If you or anyone else has time to look through the 8-K and exhibits in detail and see what else they need shares for and how many, that would be helpful.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but all QD TV's today use color filters.
What do you mean by "100% color gamut" and "without the need for a filter?"
Please tell me that QTMM is not getting distracted by blue QDs that may or may not end up in 5" displays years from now when there is $billions in demand for red-green film to go into 60" TVs today.
It also worries the heck out of me that they talk about working on solar and bio in the shareholder letter "to create tangible value to you our shareholders." Make a film and sell it. That will create tangible value. Why would you put your very limited resources into anything else until you have done that?
A patent doesn't "allow" you to produce anything. A patent isn't about what you can do. It's about what other people can't do. It's possible to have a patent on something and that something still be infringing another patent. That just means the patent office made a mistake. It's also not uncommon to have your patent claims invalidated in a IPR or trial. And that blue QD patent is an application - not a granted patent.
I don't know. I just assumed there wasn't much interest in blue QDs right now because there is so much infrastructure in place that can make LCD TVs with blue LED backlights.
It's not at all clear that BOE has done anything more than develop a prototype display in a lab. For all we know, BOE is making their own blue QDs - red and green too for that matter - in miniscule quantities. For all we know, they are cadmium-based.
We know QMA is a separate company. Someone found the incorporation form and posted it here last month. That doesn't mean QMA owns any of QMC's IP. QMC is probably licensing their IP to QMA.
I think you misunderstand what happened. QMC didn't spin off QMA, it formed QMA with GTG. In a spin off, the company no longer owns the business that was spun off - that's why you get shares in the new business. It's a big difference. In this case, QMC owns part of QMA, and they didn't spin off any of their existing business.
You and I own part of QMC. QMC owns part of QMA. You and I don't own part of QMA any more than we own part of the reactor in San Marcos.
The only way you or I could receive a share of QMA is if QMC paid it as a dividend out of their QMA ownership which would make no sense for them to do and may not even be legal under the Exchange Act.
QMA a separate company. Look at the name: Quantum Materials Asia Co., Ltd. Besides, didn't someone here post a link to the incorporation form last month?
Yes and no. The difference gets a lot smaller if you look at it as "issued" and "not yet issued."
750mm may be the right number, but to ask to go from 400 to 750 with no explanation does not seem reasonable.
Just keeping things real here. Nobody is going to pay $4 billion/MT for QDs. That would be $4,000 for the QDs in a 60" TV. I think Samsung is only getting a $250 premium for the QDs in their 60" TVs. If that's the case, your price is at least 20X too high.
The price of 500mg on some website tells us nothing about what QDs cost in large volumes.
I think your math is off by 10X. $300/50 = $6.0 not $0.6 which would make the cost $5.37B/ton. (FWIW, I think they mean metric ton not US ton).
At $5B/ton, the raw material cost in a 60"TV would be $6,000,000 assuming 1g QDs used. Obviously that doesn't work.
Based on the bits and pieces I see from various market reports, my guess is the volume price is closer to the $100,000,000 - $200,000,000/MT range or $100-$200/g. I can't even imagine how high the SP would go if QTMM sold just half their capacity in that range.
Any idea how much QD are used in solar for a square meter of film?
I don't remember reading anything about that in the Lincoln Park Capital Fund documents. What would be the point? Why would they need to reserve more than the maximum number of shares they could sell them?
Looking through the recently filed Q, everything I see that is shares or converts to shares is:
Issued and Outstanding 337,105,438
Sep 2014 Debentures 167,000
Jan 2015 Debentures 8,333,333
Apr-Jun 2016 Debentures 13,875,000
Sep 2016 Debentures 833,333
Nov 2016 Debentures 1,666,667
Warrants 31,914,784
Options 74,775,248
Restricted Stock 500,000
Subsequent Events 10,983,259
Total 480,154,063
What am I missing? It looks like they can raise several years worth of money and still be well under the 600M shares mentioned in the last proxy. I'd vote yes for 600M but not 750M. At least not without a good explanation why they need so many extra shares right now?