Replies to post #39938 on Sigma Labs Inc (SASI)

[retiredAT20]

GE going through some significant layoffs on the production side which could easily point to a new found efficiency which could be PrintRite. Also, I believe Honeywell placed their first order?

Also, big year for SGLB .... I believe the Chinese investors that had picked up the $3mil or so of shares a few years ago had the end of 2016 marked in their timeline for a number of goals to be completed by SGLB management. Fingers crossed we start to hit those goals.

[Jackle]

I would be more worried if GE hadn't been spending 2.5 years testing Sigma's technology and still working with us. I would be more worried if GE hadn't actually developed INSPECT in collaboration WITH Sigma Labs. I would be more worried if GE had a different way of reducing the time and cost of traditional inspection methods even 50% of what Sigma can offer them with PrintRIte3D can? Can you name me another way? Can you name me a technology that poses a bigger advantage to GE in its AM production?

Sigma's technology really kicks in in mass production environment. GE are not in mass production environment with it's AM parts yet. It is going through a methodical set up of a new production line which to me makes sense. It is setting the machines up, getting small lot production on the go, having a basic production set up going, checking out the kinks and then will bring in the bells and whistles in terms of independent quality control to speed up the inspection process. They need to get the basic science and basic set up ready first. (BKMMAIL this is a part answer to your mail, perhaps also they are waiting till the final Materialise link comes, who knows) Then they improve on that using PR3D. This way they also have a safety net of a working traditional production run should Sigma not be available. (A standard risk protocol) Thats the way i see it. Call it dot connecting or fricking magic i don't really care, but that makes more sense than relying on an independent company from the day one. Have the basics ready. That does not for one second mean that they will not use it. There was an article posted by CFM recently that attuned to this procedure in terms of getting production up and running and then checking for red flags and critical junctures and then building from that.

It seems you want GE to announce to you, an anonymous poster on a chat board, their future plans and suppliers for their most competitive change to production runs on the last 50 odd years. That my friend is simply not how it works. I get people here are frustrated by the time it takes to get this process up and running, but that is also why you get to buy a potential game changing stock at $30-40m market cap. Take your own risk. You obviously think there is potential here of you wouldn't have spent the best part of 3 years following it as closely as you have.

Mark Cola has been asked directly if he expects GE to utilise PR3D in the production runs, and is reply was

Yes. We fully anticipate and expect that, and we are planning for those and we are well positioned at the moment.

He has also mentioned that GE have been very vocal in using SIgma's name and technology at industry events. Can you tell me this is not the case?

GE bought Sigma into it's America Makes project on in-process inspection, a project which we are told was basically built around the PrintRite3D technology.

Mark has also said, very early on, that GE were very tight lipped and didn't like their name being published around, whereas Honeywell was more forthcoming.

GE do not release many articles on this process at all. They do not mention when they order 10, 15 new EOS machines. They do not mention the day they start small production runs. There is ALOT they do not mention for their own competitive reasons.

The two machines they have are still working away in the GE Ohio AM centre providing a use for GE 2.5 dd years after they were first taken in. If they were not of use to GE these systems, and Sigma, would have been jettisoned a long time ago.

Can you name me a competitor? Can you name me another way GE will utilise 'in-process' inspection to the degree they can with PrintRite3D? Can you name me another system with PR3Ds' technology that works (imminently) with GE's backbone AM technology supplied by Materialise? Can you name another company that has independent in-process inspection technology systems being tested by GE? Can you tell me another company who has 'in-process inspection technology' that incorporates the big data links that GE so desires with it's move towards big data led factories? You ask me for verifiable facts but it is obvious that none of us here have those. But it is verified Sigma machines are still being used by GE, even after 2.5 years.

Answers to those questions would be of more concern to me than the length of time it takes this process with GE to get up and running, and be in a position to start utilising PR3D. Everything is still going in the direction where i believe this is the case. I have not seen anything to make me believe otherwise.


This is my view, and i am sure you will find many issues with it, it seems to be the routine.

Let's not forget that we also are starting to see PrintRite3D systems embedded into other supply chains with the likes of Additive Industries (Airbus), Spartacus (Safran), Materialise etc etc. Those companies at EWI's AMC... can you suggest any other independent company who will help them reduce inspection costs and speed as much as Sigma when they set up AM runs?

I have always seen this play as a long term investment. I invest as i go along according to progress as i see it both with Sigma and the AM market as a technology. Am i concerned things are not going the right direction? Not in the slightest.

[El_Jefe42]

Do some quick math. They claimed a long time ago that the collaboration between GE and SGLB was in an effort to reduce AM costs by 25% by implementing PR3D vs traditional NDE efforts. How much in terms of $'s do you think that 25% is? Its a lot. They are spending that 25% now to get the process going. I expect that Jeff Immelt is gonna want to know why they didn't take advantage of a technology that they themselves signed up for. Do you think that they just forgot how much this was going to cost them?

GE has been evaluating and testing Printrite3D in their facilities for more than 2.5 years now without placing a single order or signaling that they are going to utilize the technology in a production mode. To predict that they are going to suddenly integrate Printrite into their mass production processes when they achieve full production is simply wishful thinking. Can you point to any verifiable fact that supports this assertion? Yes, I know, Mark tells us they are in lock-step with GE. That assertion would seem to be about as valid as his credability in meeting developmental delivery dates.