Tier 1 companies like NVIDIA or TSMC typically don’t sign commercial contracts with startups that have no proven functionality in real-world applications.
A PDK entry is a step forward — but it means little until it results in a product that actually ships. That’s not skepticism — that’s just how the industry works.
Yes, Nvidia and Coherent might be curious. Yes, a conference slide might hint at strategic alignment. But real partnerships only happen after field-proven results — not because someone showed up in Taiwan or mentioned polymers on slide 37 of a deck.
Even truly groundbreaking companies like Ayar Labs and PsiQuantum needed years of co-development before they were taken seriously by Tier 1s.
And to be clear: I’m not saying Lightwave has no future. I hope they do...
There’s a realistic possibility that Lightwave might fail — for any number of reasons. I’ll give you your favorite example, since you like comparing TFLN to EO polymers. What you say is true: TFLN is slower and lacks the energy efficiency of EO polymers. What you don’t tell people here is also true: TFLN is more stable and reliable. If LWLG can’t solve the reliability issue, then TFLN is — and will remain — the better product. Companies will choose a slower, proven technology over a faster, experimental one
Right now, companies are signing deals with TFLN. That's a fact. Of course, today isn’t tomorrow, and technologies come and go. I’m just saying that nobody here can predict which technologies will be popular in 20 years. It could very well be something neither you nor I have ever heard of...
That said, there’s also a realistic path forward where Lightwave succeeds — but it will likely take time. That path probably begins with Tier 2 or Tier 3 players: smaller companies willing to test and deploy the tech in niche, manageable applications. If that goes well, then the Tier 1s might start paying real attention. And just to be clear: that doesn’t mean investors have to wait several years. Even a deal with a Tier 2 or Tier 3 company could already have a significant impact on the stock in the short term.
Overhyping only sets investors up for disappointment — and the technology deserves better. If Lightwave succeeds, it won’t be because of speculative forum posts. It will be because the product actually works — in the real world. Not in a lab, not on a PowerPoint slide, not at a conference, not in a LinkedIn post, not because they won an award, and definitely not because Yves booked a plane ticket to Asia.
And the truth is: you don’t know if LWLG will succeed in the real world. Nobody does. Some believe it will, others here don’t. There’s a big difference between facts and wishful thinking. Providing only positive information or spreading fairy-tale narratives (like “revenge of the passive funds”) misleads people. Reposting a thousand times that LWLG is a scam — which is clearly not a proven fact — is also misleading.
Not trying to be a basher or a blind believer.
Just laying out how this industry actually works. 😉
AI
