Yes Alan, I guess that is what I am saying. Sigma and GE never said that PR3D would be used in initial production, that is something that people here wanted to believe based on wishful thinking, not on stated facts. Did you ever ask the company or GE if PR3D would be used in initial production? Did they positively confirm this request? If they didn't commit, then there is no need for them to clarify your misunderstanding of the facts.
Being in lockstep with GE does not guarantee anything, other than Sigma has been marching along with GE in the same direction, which is good. But that does not mean that GE has to do what is best for Sigma or Sigma investors. This is GE's parade and it is good that so far Sigma has been allowed by GE to march along with them, since PR3D appears to be something that GE wants and/or needs. But GE will do what is in their best interest.
There are continuing complaints on this board about lack of information and updated time lines from the companies, so there is a lot of speculation about how things might play out. Then when things don't occur as hoped on this board, people seem to think that they were misled by the company, which I don't agree with.
I find the whole lockstep discussion to be interesting. Mark made the comment to signify that Sigma and GE where headed in the same direction with closely aligned goals. That was good but again no commitments to end results. Also not a lot of clarity in the statement on whether this was just in the short term or long term. Board members took it to mean that their short term dreams of immediate adoption would be met. But the reality appears to have been that GE was working on a long term plan to get their factory up and running, and then to maybe incorporate the use of PR3D for cost savings in the long term. This is still good for Sigma but it will take more time. Some people seemed to really like the lockstep comment, so when prompted, Mark has continued to use it, even though I don't think it is really as meaningful as some believe.
Actually if you look up definitions for in lockstep, it is not necessarily a positive.
"in perfect or rigid often mindless conformity or unison <politicians marching in lockstep with the party line>"
I think Mark used it to denote that their goals were in close alignment with GE's and that they were headed in the same direction, and not that Sigma was mindlessly following GE.
I'm long Sigma and will continue to be, but based on my technical knowledge, I am not expecting immediate results.
