OK, India or South Korea or Hungary or Mexico. The point is Apple is not going to use LQMT for fabrication. If you are investing based on the relationship with Apple you need to revisit your investment thesis. When you have a few minutes, do some research on Visser Precision Castparts.
Start with your false assumptions. Let me help. 1. Apple can use whomever they want to manufacture. They will (presuming they use LQMT at all) manufacture in China 2. Neither LQMT or their production partner have the infrastructure/capacity or experience to manufacture at the volumes Apple would require. 3. Apple hired LQMT's top engineer in 2011. Their internal ability to manufacture is light-years ahead of LQMT by now. Bottom line is that LQMT will not generate any future revenue from Apple. Don't believe me? Steipp said it himself.
Thanks for the confirmation. I'll be watching 19 silver closely.
No idea, I'm not familiar with this particular application. I presume testing was completed. I suspect this application is more of a marketing/differentiation niche rather than functionality. In any case, I don't see this as adding much in the way of revenue. Wake me up when LQMT lands a military, medical device or automotive contract. Until then, this company is worth a fraction of the current valuation. A small fraction.
I believe (from memory) that the issue with the previous club heads was due to the die cast molding technique, something that should be overcome with injection molding. Don't hold me to task for this statement though.
Some good TA linked on kitcosilver. Looks like 19 is resistance for silver. Could consolidate at that level, then attempt a break or could reverse. A break could take it to the 22 level.
Precious metals? Perhaps. Any TA/Elliott Wave analysts on-board?
When a 30% move generates no activity on the message board.
Texas. The primary application is pipe coating for the oil industry.
None of the items you mentioned are produced any longer. LQMT has indicated it will be getting back into golf clubs though. Hopefully this time they don't shatter.
These items are coated in LQMT, from the previous division of LQMT that was sold a couple years ago. They do not use LQMT base materials.
So the answer is yes, Apple cannot use the Crucible IP for anything other than consumer electronics. If they wanted to, they would have to purchase (or lease) the IP from LQMT for non-consumer electronics commercialization.
There are two agreements, one pertaining to commercialization of the IP, the other pertaining to R&D sharing (Crucible). Crucible is a JV, owned by both Apple and LQMT. All R&D from both companies (during the contract period) is owned by the JV and therefore jointly owned by LQMT and Apple. When it comes to commercialization, the MTA is specific to what Apple has rights to (consumer electronics) and what LQMT has right to (anything other than consumer electronics).
So, if Apple develops a breakthrough process during the contract period, LQMT would have the right to deploy that IP for use in non-consumer electronics products. And of course the opposite case holds true, with respect to any IP generated by LQMT during the contract period.
The Iwatch will include a microprocessor, therefore its a consumer electronic application. Don't think for a second that Apple will need to revisit the contract. Apple purchased the entire IP portfolio, and LQMT purchased the IP for non-consumer electronics back from Apple. The contract was written this way to ensure Apple would not have to prove their use of the IP was for CE, but rather that LQMT would have to prove their applications are not CE in the event of a disagreement. Apple holds all the cards.
Cheap is a relative term, and compared to the cost to produce aluminum LQMT will not be cheap. It's unlikely that any of us will be sipping Pepsi out of a LQMT can, ever.
Niche may have been overstated on my part, I'll acknowledge that. I could envision parts for applications that require attributes (such as elasticity, non-corrosion) where LQMT could offer a benefit that would outweigh the inherent price premium. Remains to be seen. Remember that LQMT has delivered many prototypes and has not signed a significant contract. The price quoted by Visser to manufacture for potential customers was a primary factor that led to the termination of the relationship, and potentially to the loss of the recent business opportunities.