Zebra, you asked for evidence that commercialism is not near:
You said it is 'idle speculation', as though I have no reason at all for saying such a thing is a viable explanation for what we all have seen happen, and that I am just saying it because I want to, but that's not it. Maybe the following will help you see my view better:
First, I'll turn it around and put forward the evidence longs have pointing to near term commercialism:
1. Dr Lebby's reputation and credibility. This is an argument for his word being trustworthy as authoritative and with having reasonable vision -ie a reasonable timeliness for success.
2. There is a strong and growing need for lower power, higher bandwidth solutions, and Lightwave's tech addresses both of those.
3. Dr Lebby's statements that indicate or suggest that their foundry work has successfully demonstrated low power, higher bandwidth and that it is scalable at high volume, and is reliable.
4. Dr Lebby's May 2023 prediction for their modulators being in 8000 transceivers by year end 2024.
5. External validation (see KCC's post) suggesting some in the industry are expecting and anticipating a day - maybe even in the next few years - where they will use polymers. A few even indicating they believe polymer modulators may be an inevitable solution.
6. Dr Lebby's own reassurances that a deal can come any day, and in fact is overdue if one takes the Dec 4, 2023 letter at face value.
7. To our knowledge - that is, Dr Lebby has never said they don't - they have everything some foundry or transceiver company would or should want in order for them (ie the foundry and/or transceiver co) to get a piece of the big pie: the technology, the ease of integration, the patents, the resources.
Did I miss anything?
Now here are the things I would EXPECT to already have happened if commercialism were right around the corner:
1. If the manufacturing process were qualified by the foundry, I would expect the announcement of a qualified PDK for the entire process so that the industry themselves can start ordering foundry runs for tests that they need to perform. IF such tests were happening I would expect this to be a strong marketing point - and therefore publicly announced. As I understand it, high volume capability must be proven to the satisfaction of a foundry before they include new tech into a PDK (Dr Lebby said so in the ASM 2021). The 10K is not silent. It says "we are currently working to have our fabrication processes accepted into foundry PDKs (process development kits).". Their 10k has announced various completed work. But it hasn't done that with PDKs, so it seems pretty clear to me that no foundry has yet qualified a PDK for potential customer testing. No foundry has deemed Lightwave technology to be commercially viable yet.
2. If the material is reliable and not a problem, I would expect Dr Lebby to say so in no uncertain terms. Yet just 6 weeks ago he said very clearly that there is something about reliability that is not convincing enough for a potential partner to sign a deal.
3. If the timeline of PDK finalization and of convincing reliability were known to Dr Lebby to be near term, I would expect him to say so very clearly in order to to keep shareholders excited.
4. An actual transceiver demo. That would demonstrate that the transceiver partner they have been working with in some fashion is excited to ramp up production as soon as possible.
5. I would expect Dr Lebby to want respected external validation to help boost the stock price, and to reach out to make it happen.
6. I would expect the stock to reflect positive anticipation in the form of volume and price. I would expect very large volume days along with spikes in price, from the word getting out. Maybe not Andy, but someone(s) with deep pockets would be buying.
None of the above have happened. This is my evidence - measurable and expected events that have not yet occurred.
Your evidence appears to come in the form of TRUST in the words and predictions of Dr Lebby.
Which of these sounds like real evidence?
I have two big issues re your 'evidence' - ie trusting Dr Lebby's timelines:
First, recognize that he has missed them badly 3 years running:
2021 ASM - clearly the message implied was to expect partnerships for "mass commercialization" by year end 2021.
2022 ASM - the implied message was "PDK to be complete by year end". Never did he say anything about "front end" vs "back end"
2023 ASM - the message was "we are now a commercial entity". Never did he say anything about 200mm wafers still not working.
Second, recognize that in each case he led shareholders to expect something that he KNEW was not going to happen. I repeat: in each case he led shareholders to expect something that he KNEW was not going to happen. I hate to falsely accuse Dr Lebby (or anybody) but how can anyone in good conscience disagree? The company may well figure the end justifies the means, but if the means includes leading shareholders on wouldn't you want to know?
Dr Lebby imo is keenly aware of shareholder expectations. He gets the emails. He meets with shareholders. He's a communicator. He gives presentations. He is an expert witness in trials. He knows how to communicate! The fact that he knows what shareholders want but STILL tells them things to keep excitement going while knowing they might lose excitement if he told them the whole truth should be a HUGE part of the assessment one has of his credibility at this point in time.
And since there are all kinds of things he COULD be telling both the industry and us shareholders about like reliability, scalability, yields, customer trials, foundry involvement, etc.., without revealing a single name or violating NDA agreements, but he isn't, that further suggests there are plenty of obstacles that remain.
In my passion I've done a few things I regret and I apologize for the overstepping. And for the times I came across in a condescending way. Yes, I've wanted a lower price but I thought it was deserved and I've always been true to what I think about the company. I used to kind of get my hopes up but I've become jaded from what looks to me to just be an ongoing pattern of obfuscation and really shameless leading on of shareholders. While others are taking a few mildly encouraging things as some kind of amazing confirmation of their grand view of the big picture, the more I've learned the more it has confirmed for me that the company intentionally hides reality from shareholders, that their time is running out, and that a trainwreck may be fast approaching. But I can't look away after all this time. Eyes open.
Good luck.
