CORRECTION:
We just listened to a replay of the LQMT earnings conference call and notice that they did mention a goal of "increase shareholder value" as soon as possible or something to that effect and they also implied almost a double digit growth in revenue for the quarter (year-over- years). This is hugely positive, right.
For this stock to move into an IBD kind of category (where a stock can have accelerating price appreciation) , e.g. accelerating earnings and accelerating revenues, both would need to grow.
An attendee asked about a potential large contract (in the works or on the near term horizon) in the conference call. It sounded to me like the company kind of dodged the question ( implying not so huge right away).
Based on these two reported positions, and a prior stated position of " taking it slow(ly) to get it right", it sounds to me like things are improving but not necessarily accelerating until more periods are reported that can demonstrate an accelerating trend.
Because a customer was not mentioned in connection with the revenue growth, it most likely either came from a strategic (confidential) customer (e.g. defense), or a prospect ( vs. iGolf related we assume even though work could be in progress before an actual contract).
I thought it was positive that Steipp emphasized a business strategy objective that included (once again), a goal to produce and deliver parts (implying that they still want to be more than just an IP house, but get into the high margin side of manufacturing).
Based on a prior post and these comments, I would think that some of the issues with VPC ( already stated by someone else), might have to do with % margin split between VPC and LQMT.
Based on my professional experience, I would imagine that negotiations on revenue and/profit sharing, between VPC and LQMT, would occur on a part per part per customer basis.
Because LQMT controls the customer interface ( vs. VPC, a subcontractor), I would think that they could have the upper hand in margin negotiation, especially if they could renegotiate the "exclusivity" clause (which could give LQMT more options to negotiate more favorable revenue-sharing terms, etc.).
Anyway, the conference call sounded more positive to me than prior calls and Steipp sounded more optimistic.
Because the question about a large potential contract was kind of dodged, it seems to me that it is still "steady wins the race" ( vs. rapid growth in the near term).
Given new financial/credit arrangement to borrow money and use shares to pay/swap and potential payment to BV ( another posters comments) based on a potential future settlement, it sounds to me like there is still dilution risk with this company/stock that could potentially weigh on the stock price in the future.
It seems to me ( also stated earlier by other posters), that 2014 will be the year for LQMT to really "prove out" and that if they really do hold another ASHM soon to approve more shares (to payoff BV or whom/what ever), that dilution, etc. could potentially offset near/intermediate share price appreciation, at some point.
Personally, I'd like to see more proof of performance in 2014, but overall the conference call sounded positive ( would seem positive for long term longs investors with patience).
