If the value of the company is the same, they should both still be doable... because it's all been done proportionally. Personally I think that if Sigma really is for real- that is, that their tech becomes the de facto standard and all the other stuff that gets talked about on here daily-- if the GE/Honeywell/European/Chinese/DoD connections play out as hoped/ expected--- a share price that allows institutional investors to hop on board puts us at a much greater, or at least more timely, chance for appreciation than we had in the few pennies range. It sucks in some ways and probably will be a rocky few months up and down-- but I'm still very interested to see how the rest of this year plays out. Mark was very bullish regarding projections. The thing that stuck out in my mind, was that he mentioned even if they got no further contracts this year--- which they do not expect to happen-- even if nothing else happened, they "would still end 2016 on a positive note"..... they also JUST made a new-hire this week regarding contract printing, so I'm thinking there's quite a backlog/ multiple cards up their sleeves.... Here's hoping at any rate, haha. I, too, think China may have had something to do with it.... but I also think-- and believe Mark mentioned-- that a higher price (and pending uplist) is important for obtaining certain contracts from these big fortune 500 companies... whose boards and corporate decision makers would likely cringe at dealing with a company whose shares are only a nickel. lol.
To those crying foul and scam.... I find it very hard to believe that a Los Alamos scientist/ metallurgist/ engineer--who has worked for decades to build a reputation among government agencies, and is now being recognized by much larger players in the corporate world-- would deliberately be seeking to defraud investors or harm the little guy who's been supporting him all this time. He seems very aware that these are actual people-- much more profuse in his thanks than your run of the mill CEO-- and has deliberately run a very tight ship. I think the fact that the company still has ZERO debt is evidence that he really cares about its fortunes. While debt would have been a way to raise a lot of capital quickly-- in terms of long term stability he seems to be pretty invested in making the company something special. If he was in it just for retirement money and not for the long run, they'd have been bought by now.... instead he turned down GE years ago, in a much more tenuous position, because they "didn't know how to value them" yet, and, as a scientist/engineer he had only just begun this culmination of his years of research. That to me speaks volumes.
AI
