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.
Hummm, one might be tempted to infer from the change at their website that Pasaca exited their investment in QMC as Crunchbase reported.
If the website said otherwise, I think it's safe to say that it would be treated as if it was a public filing by the usual suspects. Somehow I doubt it will be given the same lever of credence however given it doesn't further the disneyland narrative.
A few of the questions may be fair. This one however was good for a really big laugh, but that's absolutely the only thing. I don't know how it could even be suggested with a straight face that something would ever come of it. LMAO. Pure, shameless hype.
Will the spam hype slow down?
Not anytime soon.
The truth is that there is no current information. The company stopped reporting their financials years ago and has now gone completely silent.
There are various theories of grandeur floated around, but all are based on stale old data that is shaky at best and all are contracted by other shaky data and, more importantly, common sense.
History also suggests that the theories suggesting great things are in the works should be taken with a grain of salt. Literally none of these theories has ever proven to be correct. Not even one single time in the past dozen+ years. Dozens, if not hundreds of predictions of success over that time, 100% failure rate.
Why would there be an SEC filing? Obviously, there would be one as there is no reporting companies involved. If you're going to make up BS excuses, at least make them plausible.
LMAO+++
Provide Crunchbase's resource? LMAO. Nothing like blending some hypocrisy and goal post moving in with the spam hype.
Here is a fact: if Crunchbase said Pasaca bought 51% with no resource for the data noted, the spam hypster would be be spam hyping it from the highest mountain like it was the gospel truth.
At a minimum, when folks are spam hyping the set of unsupported facts they like, they should put them in the context of the relevent unsupported facts they don't like. At least there would be some measure of intellectual honesty that way.
The truth is that is just more of the same old spam hype and that you conveniently forgot to tell the OP that Crunchbase shows Pasaca exiting the company - not investing more in it.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/pasaca-capital/recent_investments
All relistings are not equal. Folks here who have no idea what they are talking about throw around terms like S-1 like it's just a form you fill out and all is good.
Getting back on the OTC is one thing. Going through the S-1 process and a subsequent NASDAQ or NYSE IPO is quite another. I don't think the former is particularly unlikely but in my estimation, the odds of the latter happening is pretty close to zero - at least in the foreseeable future. Even if they were to launch a successful product and change management, I think it would take a year - maybe several years - of on-time (not 12b-25) filings before any bank would give them the time of day with respect to a listing on a major exchange.
LOL. It's hardly an "opinion" that the marketing comedians in the boiler room have posted a very large amount of false and misleading information over the years bother there and here. It's also not an "opinion" that they have never been right about anything of any significance.
At least two folks there knew about the Ch11 filings and decided to keep it to themselves. Curious, no?
Wouldn't that be something.
If the Solterra bankruptcy is a good thing for shareholders, why does the company stay silent on it?
Not only has the company not said anything, the boiler room folks knew and intentionally kept it a secret, and the head marketing consultant completely stopped posting right after the filing.
The "old owners" I was referring to are you and me...
The company being alive doesn't necessarily mean we will continue to be part of it.
Here we go again. The QMC marketing comedians in the boiler room are trying to spin up a case that QMC is going to get money out of the ironically named Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. What a freggin' joke.
Add yet one more item to the 12+ years long running list of 100% failed predictions.
LMAO+++
In all seriousness, there is a better chance of QMC commercializing a product than filing a S-1.
Nothing in that article has moved them or anyone else any closer to commercialization of a R2R printed QDSC, perovskite or otherwise.
As has been pointed out over and over when similar articles have been posted here over they years, these are lab-made, glass substrate and spin coated. That technology is neither scalable beyond a couple square inches nor something that can be economically mass produced - has to be made one at a time. The highest efficiency cells were 0.08 cm^2 - that about a quarter centimeter by a quarter centimeter. As they made "larger" cells, efficiency dropped off. The largest cells made were 8x8cm.
The technology to duplicate the results with scalable printing methodologies does not exist and this article claims no progress in that regard.
Click on the link below to download the materials and methods file if you're curious.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abh1885
A couple little flies in your ointment - (1) Innova doesn't need QMC for ANYTHING you listed. That's all just low-tech software that could be (and has been) developed by any competent company. (2) Obviously they have zero traction on anything listed.
I seem to remember the marketing comedians promising us pre-fab walls that could be manufactured offsite and quickly assembled into a manufacturing plant, and that in the interim, QDs would be made remotely on the equipment purchased?
What happened to all of that? How did they get everything so wrong?
Thanks for thinking about me. I was kind of hoping that there would be something new in there besides the July 2022 date? but alas, it turned out to be about 90% pictures of things that aren't Tech City, and the last 10% all appears to be a year or more old. Really, has there been any documented infrastructure progress in the past year?
It's also hard to overlook the fact that there was absolutely zero input from Amtron or the Assam government in the video. It's just some random dude making content trying to build a channel based on Assam infrastructure projects.
I don't know if QMC is alive or dead, but it seems nothing can kill DRX's spam hype train.
LMAO+++
As I predicted:
20 legit? LMAO+++
Name them.
27? LOL.
Name them.
More like 15 if you look through them.
The odds against Nanoco are not insignificant. Almost a quarter of PTAB IPR appeals result in some or all of the PTAB decision being reversed - which is one of several reasons why it's not unlikely that Samsung will appeal.
https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/blogs/at-the-ptab-blog/federal-circuit-ptab-appeal-statistics-through-august-31-2021.html#:~:text=In%20CBM%20appeals%2C%20the%20Federal,dismissed%204%20(8%25)%20cases.
Not to be a party pooper, but the PTAB isn't necessarily the final say. They can appeal to the Federal Circuit, and unlike the PTAB, the appellate judges don't know squat about STEM.
Regardless who wins, the other will probably appeal to the Federal Circuit and draw it out for a few more years.
I was referring to the marketing comedian's quote - he clearly didn't see it through your rose colored glasses. Such a typical response seen over and over for more than a dozen years now...