Wed, Nov 26, 2014, 10:24 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Microvision Inc. Message Board

pierrev55 49 posts  |  Last Activity: Nov 14, 2014 9:04 AM Member since: Feb 12, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    IM co. Ltd

    by chambmc0530 Nov 14, 2014 8:26 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 14, 2014 9:04 AM Flag

    The 4 head guys all worked at Samsung.

    Name Description
    Eul Jae Son
    Son Eul Jae is Chief Executive Officer and Director of IMCo.,LTD. Previously, Son worked for Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd as Head of Operations from February 2004 to January 2001, and as Head of RF Business from January 2005 to January 2006. Son holds a Bachelor of Business Administration from Seoul National University, Korea.
    Seong Wu Park
    Park Seong Wu is Internal Auditor of IMCo.,LTD. Previously, Park worked for BIXOLON Co.,Ltd as Chief Financial Offer and Managing Director, also served as a team leader of the communications equipment at Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. Park holds a Bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering from Sungkyunkwan University, Korea.
    Se Wun Lee
    Lee Se Wun is Director of IMCo.,LTD. Previously, Lee worked for Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd as President of subsidiary in Thailand from January 1998 to July 1999, and as President of Subsidiary in Tianjin City, China, from January 2003 to January 2006. Lee holds a Bachelor's degree in Physics from Kyung Hee University, Korea and a Master's degree in Electronics Engineering from Ajou University, Korea.
    Ji Ho Kim
    Kim Ji Ho has been serving as Non-Executive Independent Director of IMCo.,LTD since March 23, 2012. Kim also serves as Chief Executive Officer at WiISoL CO.,LTD. Kim used to be Assistant Managing Director of SAMSUNG ELECTRO-MECHANICS CO.,LTD. Kim holds a Master's degree in Electronics Engineering from Ajou University, Korea.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Their latest filing shows they still own 1,735,000 shares for which they have SOLE investment discretion and SOLE voting authority.

    Case closed.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 13, 2014 7:30 AM Flag

    You realize this is not an actual product.

    This is a request for "crowd funding" and there is guarantee you'll get any of what is advertised.

    Legal notes at the bottom:

    "Delivery of perks listed on this page is subject to the best efforts of the team and similar to other crowdfunding campaigns not guaranteed. This disclaimer has been added to set reasonable expectations for our funders.

    Please note that any crowdfunding contributions are considered final, we do not offer refunds or product returns.

    © 2014 Bleen Inc. All rights reserved. The information published herein is provided “as is” and is subject to change without prior notice."

    What this means is that there is no interest from real VC firms and they are looking at regular people to fund their development effort.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • Based on other reported holders of MVIS for the period ending on 9/30/2014:

    Princeton Capital Management owns 59,252 and it is valued at $115K.
    California Public Employees Retirement System owns 27,600 and it is valued at $54K
    Group One Trading L.P. owns 16,447 and it is valued at $32K.

    This is in line with the closing price of $1.94 on 9/30/2014

    State Treasury Of Michigan only works if you reverse the numbers and
    1,735,000 shares at $1.94 = $3,365K

    Either they filed the wrong value for their assets or they flipped the numbers.

    This is the only holder where the numbers, as of 9/30/214, do not make sense.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • What SONY indicated:

    "Sony will continue the development of this module to achieve even more compact size and intense brightness, and aims to bring it to market for use in pico projectors and other devices with projector functionality."

    More compact size:
    Obviously the smaller, the easier to embed.

    Probably needs a final custom ASIC to allow the module to be embedded without using too much real estate.

    Intense brightness:
    Possibly this may mean they want higher lumen while staying in IEC class 2. They could put a few 200mW lasers in there but the classification would make the module available to very few markets outside of industrial or commercial environments.

    This may involve higher vertical resolution, microlens array in the optical path, wider laser waist band, different scan pattern, ... MVIS has filed many patents describing how the C6 value of the IEC calculation could be increased, up to 100%.
    They indicated they are at 1920X720. Going to 1920X1080 would be a more natural resolution and would provide an increase in brightness simply due to the higher vertical resolution. A different resonant frequency mirror would be required for that.

    The red and blue lasers are available with sufficient mw of output for any need they might have. For a 35lm engine the DGLs need to achieve 140mW at WVGA, around 110mW at 720p and around 85mW at 1080p. There's no technical reason preventing SONY from making a DGLs in a TO38 package, but the yield may not be very good at the higher power.The yield would get better at higher resolution because you need less powerful lasers.

    Considering how they handled the blue lasers when they came out with the PlayStation, I do not believe a low yield would stop them from producing this engine. They took a loss on the blue lasers, with a very poor yield, but still brought the PS to market. A bit later than expected but they did.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 5, 2014 10:22 AM Flag

    You obviously missed the intent of the post.
    It was to demonstrate that the brightness can be increased by increasing the vertical resolution. Whatever the base brightness is at WVGA, the increase at 720p and 1080p will be proportional to what the parer described.

    There is no denying that MVIS has filed multiple patents describing how the brightness can be increased and stay in Class 2. Beam waist, microlens array, Lissajous pattern...

    If they were capable to produce 20 lumen at WVGA, based on Dr. Buckle calculations, you should be able to get close to 27lm at 720p and close to 36lm at 1080p.

    However the increase in brightness due to the vertical resolution increase is not in question.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 5, 2014 9:18 AM Flag

    Dr. Buckley seems to disagree with you.

    Using a source with λr = 635 nm would then
    result in an upper limit of 12.7 lm for a WVGA system.

    Brightness can also be increased by increasing the
    number of vertical lines.

    A 720p system using 635-nm red
    laser illumination could feasibly reach 17 lm while remaining
    Class 2 eye safe.

    34% increase in brightness on 50% increase in vertical resolution, from 480p to 720p.

    If you can do the math, calculate the maximum lumens at 1080p.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 5, 2014 8:14 AM Flag

    They just announced the THIRD quarter!

    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 by pierrev55 Nov 5, 2014 8:06 AM Flag

    Loss in line around $3.5M.

    Current quarter is where the action picks up.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 5, 2014 8:03 AM Flag

    If they decide to use TO38, there is no specific technical restriction on doing that.
    If that's what they meed, then that's what they'll manufacture.

    Brightness is not only a factor of the lasers, it has to do with the resolution of the engine.
    The more individual pixels the engine puts on the same surface increases the brightness.

    80mW was sufficient for 20lm at WVGA resolution.
    100mW was sufficient for 25lm at WVGA resolution.
    Going to 1280X720 would allow an increase in brightness, using the same output power.
    Going to 1920X720 would allow an increase in brightness compared to 1280X720.
    Going to 1920X1080 would allow an increase in brightness compared to 1280X720.

    My guess on their long term goal has to be at least 50lm.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Nov 4, 2014 7:16 PM Flag

    I know as much as you do regarding the SONY target application(s).
    Which means we are all speculating.

    My "opinion" is that SONY has a target device that can use what they have now,but are planning a brighter, smaller device for a higher volume market.

    I expect the high volume target application would be a mobile embedded projector.
    Cell phone? Tablet? Laptop?

    Their goal of smaller and brighter doesn't mean they do not have an application for the current implementation.

    The only fact we know for sure is that they ordered components and have entered into a service contract with MVIS.
    From this we can infer that they have a target product using the current implementation of the Picop technology.

    All this is speculation.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • From 11/01/2012 Laser Focus World article citing progress made in summer 2012.

    "Sumitomo and Sony crossed the 530 nm barrier this summer by growing diodes on semipolar {2021} GaN substrates, which they found eased the growth of homogenous InGaN quantum wells. Grown by hydride vapor-phase epitaxy, their semipolar GaN substrates had fewer than a million threading dislocations per square centimeter of surface and resistivity low enough to place ohmic contacts on the back. The fabricated lasers with multiple quantum wells 2–3 nm thick on the substrates, etched a 2 μm ridge waveguide into the structure, and cleaved mirror facets to form a 500 μm cavity, coated on one end with a 50% reflector.

    They used that structure to make CW InGaN lasers emitting from 525–536.6 nm. Output was highest at the shorter wavelengths, dropping from 167 mW at 525.1 nm to 106 mW at 532.1 nm, the longest wavelength where output exceeded 100 mW. Output was 75 mW at 535.7 nm, but they did not report a power measurement for their record-setting 536.6 nm laser"

    525nm is perfectly usable by MVIS for a 35lm projector.

    80mw = 20lm.
    100mw = 25lm.
    140mw = 35lm.

    SONY will make the DGLs they need and it will go under the radar.
    Remember the DBLs they made for themselves and put in the PlayStation?
    There was no publicly available website selling those DBLs.
    They used them for themselves.

    If the Picop based projector is as good as SONY claims, then they'll probably be a single source manufacturer of high output Picop based projection engines, including the DGLs, for a while.

    I assume they improved on those, in the last 2 1/2 years.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Bogus news

    by aboveavg_length_circum Oct 27, 2014 8:52 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 27, 2014 9:12 AM Flag

    Because he is a paid basher and posts negative titled messages that he hopes others will respond to.
    Even if you ignore him, Yahoo still displays the title.

    Therefore propagating the negative title.

    Typical paid basher technique.

    The best is to ignore such poster and not respond. This way, the message and its title do not keep showing up.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 27, 2014 8:35 AM Flag

    Slowly but surely THINGS ARE TAKING SHAPE!

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Comparing GTAT CEO and MVIS CEO

    by microvsn Oct 24, 2014 7:57 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 24, 2014 10:15 AM Flag

    The 40% was achieved but the back end 25% of that 40% (10% total) killed the deal.

    I am surprised Apple signed this deal. It seems they did not do their homework too well. If Apple had been deceived, there would not have been a nice settlement where GTAT keeps all the IP and their entire manufacturing equipment.

    If deception by GTAT had been proven, then Apple would have eaten them alive.
    Or maybe the new Apple is not as ruthless as it used to be.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Comparing GTAT CEO and MVIS CEO

    by microvsn Oct 24, 2014 7:57 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 24, 2014 10:10 AM Flag

    The paper was very proper at the time of its publishing. I never said it couldn't be sold. The paper never said it couldn't be sold. It attempted to define the limitations of Class 1 and Class 2 based on the existing technology of the MVIS ShowWX at the time.

    It was not a final number. The paper explains how lumens may increase when the vertical resolution increases or when the laser frequency is changed.

    The final conclusion of Dr. Buckley's paper, written in 2010, was

    "By calculating the equivalent photometric measure of luminous flux, it is possible to show that the brightness limits for scanned beam projection systems using current technology are approximately 1 and 17 lm for Class 1 and 2 safety classifications, respectively."

    That was 4 years ago.

    Keep up with the times.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Comparing GTAT CEO and MVIS CEO

    by microvsn Oct 24, 2014 7:57 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 24, 2014 9:46 AM Flag

    GTAT yield was around 40%, which APPLE and the investing world knew at the time of the deal. Their 2000 furnaces would have made enough glass for 10M 5.5" iPhones.

    Their biggest problem was the back end polishing process that their contract manufacturer rated at around 25% of what GTAT was sending them.

    That really yields around 10%. Very bad yield for the entire process.

    The finishing partner never really increased their capabilities and the whole thing just fell apart.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • SONY has put an actual order for components.

    There has to be a product of some sort coming out of this order.

    Once it comes out, we will have a peek at what market SONY is considering entering.

    Maybe SONY is not the finished product client but SONY would be the supplier of engines.

    I have reduced my position by 50% and await the product introduction.

    Notwithstanding the #$%$ posted on this MB, this is all that is left to do. Have a position in a high risk portfolio and wait for the product announcement. Then decide if you go on playing it an an investment or get out and go play somewhere else.


    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Comparing GTAT CEO and MVIS CEO

    by microvsn Oct 24, 2014 7:57 AM
    pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 24, 2014 8:39 AM Flag

    As usual you don't know anything and just make things up.

    In 2013 Apple sign an exclusive agreement with GTAT for sapphire glass. Over $500M.

    Everybody assumed that this was for iPhone 6 screens. However some analysts had already predicted this was not the case.

    "When we look at it, we see a lot of disadvantages of Sapphire versus Gorilla Glass. It's about 10 times more expensive. It's about 1.6 times heavier. It's environmentally unfriendly. It takes about 100 times more energy to generate a Sapphire crystal than it does glass. It transmits less light which it means either dimmer devices or shorter battery life. It continues to break. I think while it's scratch resistant product it still breaks and our testing says that Gorilla Glass, about 2.5 times more pressure that it can take than Sapphire on. So when we look at it, we think from an overall industry and trend that is not attractive in consumer electronics."

    Apple actually uses sapphire for the iWatch.

    The "faults" of sapphire were already known in 2013 and nothing has changed.

    APPLE may be the culprit more than GTAT in that failed adventure.
    They agreed to recoup their money, in a 4 years period, no interest and GTAT gets to keep all their IP and all their manufacturing plants, with no strings attached.

    We do not know what was included in the original agreement as this has been sealed from public view during the trial.

    Investors jumped the gun although some had predicted this would happen.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • pierrev55 pierrev55 Oct 17, 2014 9:28 AM Flag

    Not related at all.

    GTAT does produce GaN for LED manufacturers.

    They are not in the laser diodes business.

    Apple wold not build their own DGLs.

    This is just plain ridiculous.



    Sentiment: Hold

1.82+0.0400(+2.25%)Nov 26 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
SeaDrill Limited
NYSEWed, Nov 26, 2014 4:01 PM EST
Veeva Systems Inc.
NYSEWed, Nov 26, 2014 4:03 PM EST
Avanir Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
NasdaqGSWed, Nov 26, 2014 4:00 PM EST