Lightwave Logic Inc (LWLG)

[tedpeele]

Here's the ASM 2023 argument:

"Commercial acceptance" is the reason Dr Lebby gave for not addressing the prior year goals or setting new goals, particularly with regard to progress with Foundries:

Unidentified Company Representative

One other question on the presentation. You didn't really cover anything as far as the goals and—previous goals and forward goals for next year. One thing that comes to mind is the tech transfer agreement. Can you tell us what is left to finalize the PDK and get a tech transfer agreement? You had spoken about joint PRs at some point. Can you give us some indication as to where we stand and what might be needed still in order to get the finalization of a PDK and what goals we might have for next year?

Michael Lebby

Last year and the year before, I gave yearly goals. I think that's okay if you're pre-commercial. But what we gave here is we gave more of a licensing roadmap. That's more what you would expect from a commercial company. Doing yearly goals, I think, should step aside to real commercial goals.

And earlier he said re the PR:

The impact of this is commercial market acceptance. That's really the impact. We have to look at what's really important with the press release this morning. We made some commercial traction. The market accepts what we have

LOOK AT WHAT HE JUST SWEPT UNDER THE CARPET!!: NO ACCOUNTING FOR ANY OF THESE:

Dr Lebby laid out these goals during ASM 2022 for the next 12 months:
1. Polymer Plus Prototypes -> Beta/Qualification plan
2. Polymer Slot Prototypes -> Beta/Qualification plan
3. Establish deal with partner -> Announcement of partner
4. Establish deal with foundry -> Announcement of partner
5. Qualification of product -> Published data/specification
6. Licensing of polymers -> 1 licensee
7. Technology transfer -> 1 tech transfer to manufacturing


We still don't know officially what the "agreement" was for, and certainly there has been no sign that the agreement is evidence of market acceptance, and we know the Foundries aren't yet commercially ready.

This brings into question Dr Lebby's decision to not review the Foundry goals and set new ones. Instead of using the vague commercial PR as proof of market acceptance

Could there be another, much simpler reason for Dr Lebby's silence and evasiveness? Could it be that a review of goals would reveal that they really didn't achieve much progress with foundries?

Notice too the following:In the past 2 years Dr Lebby went through pre-written questions and answers in the Investors section:

In 2021 he covered 14 questions, taking 3 1/2 minutes beginning at minute mark 24:07
In 2022 he covered 26 questions, taking 8 minutes 47 seconds, beginning at 44:10
In 2023 he covered ZERO pre-written questions.

No-one really knows how close or far away commercialization with foundries is, and this is critical because without that there will be no ubiquity.

Overcoming technical hurdles, cost hurdles, and being able to ramp up to high volume (scaling) all MUST happen in order to be viable commercially. Back in 2017 Dr Lebby showed a graph with over 20 major roadblocks to commercial viability.

42 minute mark. How many of those are still remaining, unsolved, that Lightwave MUST solve before true industry/market acceptance? What did Dr Lebby mean when he said this about scaling, when asked at this year's ASM?:

In terms of scaling, we are much more comfortable this year with scaling than we were last year

He won't tell us, he will no longer be accountable to us.

What's the upshot re Foundries and their true proximity to commercialization? Dr Lebby is basically saying "Trust Me we got this.". Why should we?: Given his rather large misses on Foundry Goals in 2021, apparent large misses in 2022, his claim to commercial acceptance in the absence of any corroborating evidence, his sudden decision to clam up entirely regarding where things stand with Foundry work, his stating at best things are progressing in certain ways and that they are more comfortable with things like scaling than they were last year (what does that mean?), while simultaneously being dependent on them to act only when they want to, a 12-18 month of 'kitchen recipe" issues - given all of these things - knowing that each foundry cycle takes 6-9 months, should we Trust that they are on the verge of being on the verge of commercial success, much less of being commercially viable at all?