I agree with that assessment 100%. This is still very much a gamble, but their is enough connections with the big guys that keeps me hanging around and adding when I can.
Do you think that GE refering to Sigma Labs and actually having the Sigma Labs corporate symbol in some of their presentations as failing to meet the threshhold of
they have yet to receive any true recognition/adoption by a large player.
? and if this is insufficient, what would be required of GE in order to "recognize" Sigma Labs technology?
Similarly, would a joint presentation between Sigma Labs and Honeywell regarding DEFORM not qualify as "recognition"? Again, if this is insufficient, what would be required of Honeywell in order to "recognize" Sigma Labs technology?
Similarly, would inclusion in America Makes or NIST grants qualify as "recognition"? Again, if this is insufficient, what would be required of America Makes or NIST in order to "recognize" Sigma Labs technology?
Similarly, would inclusion in EWI qualify as "recognition"? Again, if this is insufficient, what would be required of EWI in order to "recognize" Sigma Labs technology?
Thanks in advance for a little more detail to support your conclusions.
Who's picture do you see within the introduction of this forum under the PrintRite3D banner? GE Engineer, Todd Rockstroh, discusses quality assurance to a record attendance at Laser Additive Manufacturing (LAM) and lists SGLB among GE continuing partnerships 03/2014: