Replies to post #85745 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[Slacker3]

I think so lqmt can still get defense parts and approved contract manufacturers in that area. Correct me if im off on that. I wish we would announce some parts and european contract manufactures to keep momentum going. I hope theyre not holding back til shares are approved and this deal finalized and Li on bod

[Watts Watt]

I can not answer this question without some research, but thanks for asking.

[mowo]

Here's hoping for:
• Stock buy-backs
• Big contract announcements
• Reverse split (100:1 preferably!!!)
• Re-listing on NASDAQ

Perhaps 46% is enough for him to have a majority following stock buy-backs.

[Watts Watt]

I sincerely respect the nature and quality of the questions you ask.

I have reviewed your two posts:

investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121532195

Does Apple have a say upon any 51% ownership of LQMT?

If yes, professor Li will most likely max out at 46%.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121532841

What is motivation for Li to stop at 46% from the get-go?

Let me suggest a possibility which has not yet been presented, but I think is a very high probability:

Though it appears that Professor Li is currently bounded by a limitation of 46%, we must recall that when the terms of the purchase agreement are satisfied to both parties satisfaction, Professor Li has the right to designate two new directors to the board of directors which by charter is limited to 7 directors total. I believe that, unlike the current existing members of the board (apart from Li) who have no obligation to put skin in the game and can be rewarded stock options without any merit, the new appointees will be required by Li to invest in the Company, and invest in LQMT to the extent that LI with his 46% and his other appointed directors with a combined total investment of more than 5% will allow these three to effectively control the company.

I say this based upon a rudimentary understanding of Chinese public companies.

First,

stock options are a relatively new phenomenoma in China from about 2006.

Second,

By Chinese law ESOs are performance-vested. Memorandum No. 1 recommends using both market-based and sector-adjusted performance indicators. Options become vested only when performance is better than previous record. For example, net profits are positive and higher than the latest three-year average before the grant date.

Note how much superior an ESOP this type of plan is for the outside shareholder as opposed to Steipp's non-performance based give away option plan is.

It is a totally different mentality and ethic, isn't it?

Based upon above, I believe Li will gain majority control by the combine of his shares plus the shares of his two appointees.

Obviously, he will appoint directors who are loyal to him and would vote with him in concert as a block.