Replies to post #188646 on Lightwave Logic Inc (LWLG)

[frobinso]

NLM seems to be in the race on the materials front, but I would be surprised to see EOP material commercialization without them crossing LWLG Intellectual Property somehow along the way. Those battles are not waged until something is commercialized, so I just need to watch it all very closely.

Yes, perhaps he is trying to lead his upcoming talk, but I would not give him the highest grade on how he is going about the execution, and setup for talking points. Is Dr. Lebby on the discussion panel? If not, it is really a poor way to approach it trying to go after someone who is not going to be in the panel discussion to respond in kind. Those types of actions can backfire.

I completely doubt his sincerity that if a Hyperscaler engineer sung the virtues of EO Polymers, and even if we land a commercial deal with a foundry that he will start cheerleading Polymers. He may well have the opportunity soon, so at that time we can see what tune he comes up with, and whether his tune changes. He perhaps set himself up more than he tore Dr. Lebby down.

[forztnt2]

I hope LewisJ from NLM speaks to progress regarding the SBIR with NASA and AIM Photonics assessing the use of OEO for outer space related applications. Proving out Organic modulators for outer space and free space comms will open up a new line of opportunity for all, and increase acceptance overall. Working with AIM photonics is a big deal for polymers as well.

[tedpeele]

Mark L's BIG POST, Lewrock, Microchips, KCC's validations:

Saving the best for last (Mark's post), I'll start with the latest 'discussion' stemming from my challenges to longs, and Lewrock in particular, re the company's credibility being compromised - and the evidence being the primary messages in each of the last 3 ASMs:
 
LEWROCK, your refusal to even acknowledge - much less try to counter - my points about each of the last 3 ASMs being great examples of intentional misguidance by a CEO who knew he was misleading investors by both what he said and what he didn't say, should speak volumes to newcomers.

It's sad really. I won't comment on your claim re the Tier1s further until you give your opinion about what I wrote. Why should I when you've already (and recently) demonstrated a tremendous lack of judgement by implying Vanguard was buying for profit at $18?


MICROCHIPS, nice try, but I don't consider the 'signs of progress' to point to a big picture at all. Rather I see the continued OBFUSCATION regarding their progress to point to the true big picture:

What obfuscation? How about the things he could address but doesn't?:

How many wafers has the company received?
How good are yields?
What reliability tests remain and when will you have results for those?
How many devices have been made to standards in foundries?
What scalability tests remain and when will you have results?
When will a PIC be made?
How many foundries are you now working with each on Slot, and Plus?
When will a single foundry validate your tech 'progress' as being complete with a PDK?
When will a transceiver company finally agree to produce a demo?

A former employee recently wrote that shareholders don't ask the hard questions at the ASMs. With few exceptions that is dead on.

The BIG PICTURE, microchips, is very clear to me and while I never thought I'd stick around for nearly 2 full years following this so closely, EVERY STEP of the way has validated the BIG PICTURE which is this: The company is a carrot dangler in order to keep the doors open.


KCC, I believe you are being honest. Just overly optimistic and trusting. I sent you an email btw. check it out.

KCC, you may view your list of 10 external validations as a great counter to what Mark L posted yesterday, but I really don't see why you would feel this way. And then for you to say the things you said to discredit him....anyone can check out his Linkedin, background, reviews, publications and find out. When I do that I see someone with deep connections who is upfront but does look for solid evidence before he gets too excited about new ideas/changes in the industry. that sounds pretty wise to me for an analyst, and yes that may cause some to not care for his style, but - He's been around. He's seen how the industry works.

I'm curious KCC which of your top 10 you see as the most important? Your #1 and #6 sound the most promising to me on the surface, but AIM Photonics (the foundry planning to offer polymers in the future) is a govt-led initiative, so would think that's going to move at a pretty slow pace. Wouldn't you have rather someone like Intel have said that instead of an entity that appears more geared toward helping startups/research companies? Your NVIDIA comment sounds good but "new materials" could just as easily be TFLN. What exactly do you find so compelling in your list?


THE BIG MARK LUTKOWITZ POST:

WOW FOLKS - we FINALLY have some input from an analyst!!!. What happens? People here jump all over him - accusing him of 'odd behavior', being a 'black sheep', etc.

How about addressing the actual POINTS that he made?

Mark's post made several points, that I think make sense from an analyst perspective, but more importantly should be taken seriously due to his connections with all kinds of people in the industry, including the hyperscalers -- has anyone noticed he has some 8,900 followers (as opposed to 3,100 for Dr Lebby)? The man's experience is deep, with over 60 publications on the industry.

Did anyone also notice several Lightwave employees - including the director of reliability - gave his post a 'Like'? His post had 18 Likes 4 hours after it was done (when I first saw it, thanks to Carlin)

IT sounds to me that all Mark is looking for is some compelling evidence - and despite possibly seeing the demo (per one of the comments), he isn't convinced yet.

Here's the meat of his post re Lightwave's prospects:

1. External validation from an authoritative source:

As always, fibreReality will become convinced that Lightwave is offering something substantial when a top-level engineer at a hyperscaler tells us that is the case.

Obviously that hasn't happened.

2. Only one winner is likely due to the required industry investment:

For now, as this writer asserted as a speaker at the Rump Session, at ECOC 2022, there can expected to probably be only one big winner of the novel materials under consideration (please see: https://lnkd.in/ea79trrq). The amount of industry investment necessary to enable a new platform is quite significant, along with large volume always driving unit cost considerations.

This is debatable, of course, but Mark would seem to be in a far better position to say this than most of us.

3. He sees TFLN as the likely winner down the road (see his links)

Thin-film lithium niobate is very likely to be assume that role (please see: https://lnkd.in/efansFJ9).

I would like to know more about WHY he thinks TFLN might win. He's mentioned Ciena and we know of Andy's Arista interest..but given what he said for #1 I think we can reasonably assume he has gotten a fair amount of feedback as opposed to none at all re Lightwave from from hyperscaler engineers, since that seems to be an important criteria to him.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-lutkowitz-b22abb2/recent-activity/all/

So, does anyone care to talk about those? Is it really possible that Lightwave is a 'dark horse' after all this time that nobody in the industry seems to know or talk about much about despite the fact that the CEO is 'up front and center' at big conventions like ECOC?