Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[Watts Watt]

I take no offense at your post. But factually, I can't agree with your take on my optimism.

Since August-Sep 2010 I have been extremely skeptical in my posts.
You probably need to read Yahoo again to find out I have challenged Steipp many times, and even as recent as his PR discussing "in the midst of shipping"

So in that respect, I have been a lot more negative than you.

I asked you to clarify your answer on the number of outstanding shares since you left the rest of us hanging with an open ended, albeit response. Since then, I have decided that it is not out of reach to discuss the "equivalent" upside to 80 cents, even though you believe them to be substantially different.

I think that they are substantially the same. In one case, the sep 10 run up was based upon a false "expectation" or "rumor" if you will, that future revenues would automatically come to LQMT because of the MTA of that time frame. Now we are dealing with a similar run up based upon a rumor, but this time, the odds of the rumor being correct (hopefully sooner than too later) are far more likely to occur than the false expectations of the Sep 2010 run.

You see, there is actually a lot more known now than was known then. There was no knowledge of a new injection molding process, it was only hinted at. Today it is a fact. It is also a fact that it does work. Only the efficiency is being improved upon. Fact.
In 2010, there was no list of 80 NDA's and 900 plus inquiries.
Today there is. In 2010, the patent applications concerning several major process changes, formulation changes, and those concerning injection molding and new electric arc technologies are solid fact. In 2010 there was not a hint of a change in business plan strategy, in a change of CEO and a whole new Slate of Directors. Today, all of these are a fact. In 2010 there was no hint of billion dollar revenue companies like Materion and Engel bailing out Liquidmetal by up fronting capital investment. Nor was there a hint of a sub contractor partner VISSER who is also upfronting capital. Finally, there was no finality in 2010 that LQMT could sell the Pyong Taek Facility and equipment as it was tied up in litigation both with the Korean Govt and the Kong Min Bank (not going to bother to look up the correct spelling). Nor was there a hint of spinning off the interest we had in the coatings business. TODAY. ALL OF THOSE OLD FACTORS OF UNCERTAINTY are behind us.

You imply that I can not accept the possibility of another major downside. Sir, I have lived through every major downside of this company since the IPO in Tampa Florida. I have lived through a change of 5 accounting firms. i have lived through a Class Action Suit. A Criminal Fraud case, a relocation of headquarters 4 times.
I have lived through a down sizing from 215 plus employees down to 15. Do you still believe I cannot accept the possibility of another downside? Only a fool would not accept that eventuality.

But frequently, those who have watched a 9 year slide just can't get it through their heads that such a slide can ever win. Do you know how many times LQMT almost went bankrupt? How about at least once every year for the past 9.

So with caution only, even as late as the first upside due to this rumor, I insisted to this board even that the run up really is not about Apple. This run up is due to a major structural and psychological market view of LQMT as a going concern.

This is where we differ in our views, sir. And strongly. This rebound we are seeing here is not what you would probably like to call it, a dead cat bounce.

A major turning point in the structure of the company, in the way the Company is viewed by potential customers, by the way the technology is now at hand and accepted with a twice look over my metallurgists and engineers, sir, there is not really much point in discussing a pullback which is a tree, when you do not see the forest. Sorry, not meaning to offend. We simply have two views. Mine is long term. Yours is short term. it is hard to mix the two trains of thought.

Best wishes to you. I noticed you did not respond at all to my suggestion that LQMT has great potential to have major contracts in the electronics are with the military and government agencies who need reliable communications devices which are contemporary and more reliable and sturdy due to potential use of liquidmetal components...........totally unrelated to Apple's consumer electronics monopoly.

I think you need to address that before you insist that I cannot accept opposing views. I challenge YOU to accept MY opposing views.

Thanks and good luck to you, whether I hear from you again or not.

PS and I hope you don't take offense, please regard your post which demonstrates your own ability to understand opposing views:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=74614195

I guess we all can make mistakes. So, smile, and have a nice day.

I would not argue about or around a benjo, because they are very handy when you are in need of one.