Replies to post #39758 on Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (LQMT)

[Watts Watt]

Sorry, I didn't read that at all.

Steipp should have said, we will sell the concept of using liquidmetal parts, get an order for the parts, manufacture the parts, and GET PAID for the parts. this is the normal course of business.

VPC will make the parts; so far LQMT has no other basis legally or capability wise to make parts.

Licensing will be the fees LQMT gets from the turn key systems, the customers of which do the manufacturing and pay a fee for the right to do so. Normally, a sound business would wish to receive a royalty payment for piece. However, we haven't seen Steipp ever negotiate a contract that way, except with VPC, though we do not have any proof of that.

Just my humble thoughts, which, most likely, do not agree with yours.

[AliAz]

vanwes1- "I thought the statement above hinted at revenues from selling of Engel machine. I got this from the conference call on friday. Please clarify if I'm off base with that assumption."

I listened to the CC (replayable at the LQMT website) very carefully to hear the "hint" you think Steipp made re direct revenue from Engel sales of the LQMT machine.

Since you asked me to clarify if I think you are off base in your assumption, please allow me to do so as follows:

YES, I do think you are off base in your assumption.

What I heard, as I can't account for what you assumed was a "hint", was a DODGE when Steipp was asked point blank whether there would be revenue from the sales of the Engel machine.

The revenue will be from the license for any L-M material patents held by LQMT or Crucible for non-CE parts. He fumbled to answer the direct question. My assumption, and I don't need to prove a negative, is that there will be no such revenue. Why do I believe that? Because LQMT has given no reason to believe there will be revenue from the sale of the machines.