Replies to post #46132 on Lightwave Logic Inc (LWLG)

[inversor86]

So the point being, sucks that it takes longer, but we don't want investors assuming results should be out and when they don't hear anything taking it as negative when really they aren't even ready yet.


I thought the replies were vague regarding the testing timeline. They purposefully do not want to answer questions that will tell you when tests started or will be finished. I don't understand why they are cagey about that topic. As you can see I was told the tests are "a standard practice" so I would think the time it normally takes to complete doesn't need to be kept a secret from shareholders.

My impression from the slightly awkward wording is that they are concerned about being perceived as stagnant until the testing is finished. I wasn't worried about that personally. If several companies are now waiting for this data, they will all get it at the same time. That could make things get interesting very quickly.


I guess they did not learn their lesson from December. When, because of lack of clarity, there was anxiety over the stock dropping while we were expecting news on device testing. In reality, there were no issues and it was just time to tap LPC. These scenarios hurt investors via that additional dilution they create.

[th6565]

Thanks for sharing. I thought the responses were quite positive, maybe I already set my mind for completion of the tests to the end of 2019.

[prototype_101]

Inversor, thanks for posting this reply,

Lightwave: This testing was described by a board member to give an example of common expectations and practices that explain why not everything can be accelerated by working harder. For telecom/datacom optics, this is a standard practice and so these sorts of timescales are typical.

But it is not a simple one time start, pass the time and then end. So I can say we have started but you should not infer that 5000 hours later we are done for good. Equally, it is incorrect to infer that we cannot do anything else until these 2000 or 5000 hours are done. Our goal is not to check off a piece of paperwork, our goal is to build confidence in the platform.

So my interpretation is that the 2000/5000 hours are fairly linear but that doesn't mean that the Tier 1's won't throw additional testings into the mix along the way, so maybe at 1000/2000 hours and everything is performing rock solid, then they throw a few more advanced tactics to try and "break" it, then if it still survives onward to say 2000/3000 hours then perhaps an even tougher set of trials/challenges are thrown at it, and so on until the Tier 1 at some point says "WoW just Wow" and then LWLG inks a HUGE deal for "design-in"

Let's not forget that LWLG's strong suit has always been STABILITY, so I would expect no problems in Reliability testing, and I believe the quote from the ASM by Dr Leonberger adds greatly to confidence of impending success

Fred Leonberger: Great to see him there. He was very enthusiastic and said the data will come and "it will be great."

[gatesoft55]

But it is not a simple one time start, pass the time and then end. So I can say we have started but you should not infer that 5000 hours later we are done for good. Equally, it is incorrect to infer that we cannot do anything else until these 2000 or 5000 hours are done. Our goal is not to check off a piece of paperwork, our goal is to build confidence in the platform.

"OUR GOAL IS NOT TO CHECK OFF A PIECE OF PAPERWORK, OUR GOAL IS TO BUILD CONFIDENCE IN THE PLATFORM"


My take is that LWLG is testing for 2000/5000 hours or until potential customers have enough confidence in LWLG's platform. So possibly LWLG does not have to run the full 5000 hours of testing to get potential customers on board? I guess it boils down to what is required for customers to have enough confidence to adopt this platform. The customers will let us know when they have enough data.


GATES.

[Rubes0908]

Just a Thank you for sharing and taking the initiative to get some answers about the testing time frame. EOM