Replies to post #38558 on Sigma Labs Inc (SASI)

[Envirosciguy]

What's changed with SGLB in the last week that has drastically changed your outlook from this:

Great conference today,

When multiple multi-billion dollar companies, as well as
start-up companies trying to get a piece of the pie, are
all looking at using Sigma Labs technology...it is really
showing the possible valuation this company may have
once the market has matured and additive
manufacturing is a regular practice in the production
world. Vivek summed it up great near the end of the
call regarding FAA and other regulatory agencies.

This process is new and has yet to find its foot in the
ground. But based on past process techniques we can
tell the regulatory process will be more intense as each
printer needs to qualify each part that it prints. SGLB
was made exactly for this need and have the product
suite and cooperative agreements to make it happen.

Whether it be days, months, or years, SGLB will grow
with the market at the very WORST. Turning this 50 million
dollar startup, into a major player in the Additive
manufacturing space. At the very best, SGLB tech is used
worldwide as the first technology software certified by
various regulatory agencies as industry standard for
in-process quality assurance for additively manufactured
parts.

The upside is fantastic.

[DriftinWayOfLife]

KMey,

I am a bit late to the discussion of your point of view, however, I would like to bring up a couple of points.

First, with a burn rate of 1M covering +/- 9 months and Sigma holding more than 1M in cash, plus the recent delivery of 3 PR3D systems (Honeywell, Spartacus and a company to be named later) with payment most likely to come either at the very end of this quarter or early in Q1 2016, it would appear to me that Sigma has sufficient cash to continue for a year, as stated by MC during the earnings report.

Second, as to the "increasing expenses" - does this not reflect a ramp up to allow for capacity for delivery of PR3D systems during the year for which cash is already in the bank and which may very well generate more revenues during the 1 year that the current cash will cover?

Third, is it not reasonable to expect some compensation from Additive Industries for the 4 PR3D systems to be embedded in the MetalFab machines that are to be delivered to the beta testing companies - thus generating more cash to continue operations until the "significant revenue" starts to arrive?

Fourth, do you disbelieve MC when he stated that the level of activity in the contract printing area through the Arete-Sigma joint venture are building?

These are just a few off the top of my head, but these questions - and the implied and express position that I take - suggest that Sigma is sufficiently funded for the time being.

I would agree that dilution CAN be a bad thing, but I do not agree with the idea that dilution is ALWAYS a bad thing. Just think back to the private placement a couple years ago of 120,000,000 shares - that kept the doors open. Without that dilution, would Sigma exist today?

patience and GLTA