Replies to post #43302 on Quantum Materials Corp. (fka QTMM)

[Kinnaree]

.1% is ok?

[BigE1960]

You have been here long enough to see many examples of how objectivity towards QTMM can be (no longer surprisingly) confusing and objectionable.

The market and the QTMM SP did not react to the 10-q because the complete story is not simple or crystal clear or yet written. It is obviously difficult to connect the dots for most, even for hardcore regular observers. As a result, the subsequent open-minded exchange of ideas gets perceived as a threat to those in possession of the one and only true answer for QMC.

[chessmite]

....wouldn't want to be remiss in the Big picture scheme of things would we? ; )

Nanoparticles are particles between 1 and 100 nanometers in size. In nanotechnology, a particle is defined as a small object that
behaves as a whole unit with respect to its transport and properties. Particles are further classified according to diameter.

A quantum dot (QD) is a crystal of semiconductor material whose diameter is on the order of several nanometers

Nanorods are one morphology of nanoscale objects. Each of their dimensions range from 1–100 nm.

Nanotechnology deals with dimensions and tolerances of less than 100 nanometers, especially the manipulation of individual atoms and molecules.

As nanotech entails building from the small to the large and qds are incorporated into processes, how do you determine the needs for qds w/o knowledge of the whole? Can we just study the science of qds and pre-determine mkt needs and direction?

If desire is all things QD, why isn't there information about all 20 companies,(available since 2010) that produce QDs?
Some of those can also produce nanorods and etc.....is that considered important?

Is this a msg bd about QMC or every QD company out there? If it's about qds and competition, why isn't specificity and opinion
included as to why it's considered competitive so an actual discussion could be had?
Should we post information about Sigma Aldrich, Invitrogen, and others, (since they may be considered competitive wrt qds for medical)?

We all know QMC's niche is mass production according to companies' specifications.

How many other companies also make claims to mass production according to companies' specifications? That's the competition.

How many are publically traded companies? That's direct competition for investors $$$.

Whom do you consider QMC's competitors and of those whom is considered direct competitor(s)?

WRT all things QD: I like the science because it often indicates things yet to be.
QMC is on the cusp of breaking out as a supplier to companies in the nanotech field, imo.

Do you still want info about all things QD? If so, when can we expect to see the reflections of your footsteps being congruent with your desire?


wrt negativity about posts, I think it's more about diffusive information w/o specificity or opinion, (other than neg aspects
at times).

A msg bd of investors and those seeking knowledge would seem to imply an inherent positive bias. This bd was positive and
fun at one time. It was also very productive w/information, as indicated by the intro. I'd say very positive given the amount of
free labor and hours put into it, (when not much was available).

Your post indicates a neg bias now; have you discerned the real reason why?

Appreciate your input.

Regards