I should know better. Oh well, here goes:
A.) "There are so many applications utilizing quantum dots as we move forward."
- You are correct that down the road there could be a large number of applications that will utilize QD's and other QMC materials. Maybe a few of these will be commercialized over the next 5 years. With the exception of lighting and solar (each with their own technical barriers to overcome, e.g., stability), there are not any that come to mind that will be as large as the display market of the next few years.
B.) "Recent share price predictions by fellow board members are focused on the display market but lets not forget all the other avenues quantum dots will be used for going forward."
- As I said, my conservative model is driven by QMC's production capacity. It's the only variable where we have a confirmed number- 2,000 kg. The company themselves is on record as saying their expansion is for the display market. Are you suggesting they are intentionally misleading us?
C.) "IMO we will not be waiting years for further avenues and continued addition of larger reactors."
- My words were "high volume avenues," not "further." And, I never commented on additional reactors.
D.) "...I see this as a huge indication that the market for quantum dots has arrived."
- Well, the display market appears to be arriving. With respect to kg and dollars, it may be the dominant segment in the overall QD market for the next several years. And thus, the large TV display market may essentially be the QD market. I'm not sure why QD's success in displays has any impact on its success in security inks, nanobio, etc. That is a leap I don't understand. The end use property requirements are all different.
E.) "Also have to take issue with the notion that the 3D printing Virginia technology will "fade away" why would they let this happen?"
- My words were, "... it is possible that in four months the 3D printing/anti-counterfeiting technology may just fade away." That is a logical possibility considering QMC has an "option" on the IP and chose to "evaluate" it for 12 months to determine whether or not this specific invention can be successfully commercialized, i.e., profitably. The company may have used the agreement for added visibility via a press release, but it would be remiss of us to ignore the limited investment ($10K) and commitment they made 8 months ago. They are test driving the IP. What additional information do we have to conclude it is worth carrying on and making a full investment? As I said we'll know more soon.
AI
