Replies to post #220166 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[jaybiscuit]

I’m reading now, but I believe the LMG/ATJ is a separate agreement and is not related to the yihao agreement. Still researching but here’s why I think that so far: the contracts have different terms (5 years vs 3 years), the LMG/ATJ portion says that ATJ is manufacturing and doesn’t mention another manufacturing option, and the yihao agreement says they will have to ship to Liquidmetal customers. Since ATJ is a licensee and manufacturing on its own, I don’t this this would apply. Also, Liquidmetal, in the yihao contract says it is seeking us based manufacturing for trade terms—this wouldn’t apply to ATJ at all. Plus amorphous alloys are banned by the PGA in the USA. So right now I think these are separate contracts. Again still looking at it.

[jaybiscuit]

I agree, this is beef! Finally.

Right now I still think the yihao contract is separate—possibly Apple. Still reading though. The capacity phrase in 2.5 seems to say “all” yihao’s manufacturing capacity plus 10%. Still reading but this could in theory lock yihao up completely to Liquidmetal for 5 years yet Liquidmetal leaves itself open to capacity and other manufacturing by saying yihao is “non exclusive”. I’m not 100% yet, still reading and thinking about this.

[Spartan]

"3% net sales prices for the product goes to LMG (Liquidmetal Gold Subsidiary), which LQMT is owner."

This part disturbs me. Why not 3% gross?

Net of what? This one little 3 letter word leaves the door wide open for shenanigans.

Perhaps I'm misreading what it means but gross seems much more straightforward.

[Watts Watt]

I believe it's about 80 percent.