Liquidmetal Technologies Inc (QB) (LQMT) Quote

15 year build and still acquiring patents. Over 30 patents approved for foldable phones by Apple.

I believe we both agree that Apple waits to see the kinks, irons them out and then tries to best the competition, while companies like Samsung offers the bells and whistles. Same history with Verizon. Other companies offer the best plans with all of the trimmings for less, while Verizon tries to offer the best connection. 5g is offered by others first, Verizon improves on it and then tries to grow a bigger base.

Perhaps the big wait might also be dependent on this too. The foldable phones have not been adopted by businesses for their employees yet as many offer iPhones to their employees. In essence there are (millions of) many iPhones out there not purchased by individuals but by employers for individuals. Perhaps Apple would have to sweeten the pot for them to adapt. That would give the exposure of I have to have one too.

So far there has not been a rush from consumers to indulge or cut into Apple’s bottom line.

Without waivers LQMT still might benefit from the hype and exposure. Just like the original cell phones Germany had them first. Japan had HDTV first. It takes a lot of time for the USA to catch up. The sad part is we still don’t do most of the manufacturing. Maybe some of that will change due to tariffs. It’s starting to.

The USA invents the technology. It is outsourced and exploited abroad and then is perfected and repackaged here years later.

Bottom line: I don’t think Apple is adding patents to prevent the growth or demand for foldable phones, but to say the simmering is done. Time to serve. If you research the patents they are not just more of the same as employed abroad.

One of the purchasers involved in the LL .16 cent deal owned a company making foldable phones with amorphous metal hinges, which recently filed for bankruptcy last year. I posted about him in a few of my posts. Got no feedback from anyone on this board or abroad. Who knows? Like I said in a recent post quoting someone else in the news: no communications only leads to speculations.

Hype hope pump potential and speculations and TC end of year spin, aren’t worth jack any more with this dice roll.

Is that it? I’m very disappointed. I expected more. Hope you feel better, get well soon.

And you are a broken record reporting the same old same old week after week without an orginal thought, or just insulting others.

Brittle was my word and probably not well chosen. It’s not my sense that Liquidmetal is brittle, only that it fractures precipitously when it fractures. Don’t want to be spreading FUD.

No story, I'm curious as to how far this has come along, 15 year build out sounds as if it's been simmering for long enough. 

Ah! The good ‘ol Mid Frame Box!!!

The story line used to be: Because of Antenna-gate, LQMT was the only possible solution for Apple because LM 106 was the only know material that RF frequencies could pass through yet still provide the sturdy framework up to Cupertino standards. Of course production was going to have to begin immediately to meet insatiable iPhone 4 demand. There were supposed secret documents and sketches posted here showing the plausibility. This was back in 2010 or so.

What is the story now?

Thanks for your input. It was interesting but somewhat dated (although it had no date).

The only real reference to brittleness was really a comment regarding its lack of ductility and the fact that it doesn’t “telegraph” when it’s about to fail. Conventional metals conform to Young’s Modulus and elongate prior to failure but BMGs break at a much higher level but precipitously. It’s a difference but not a “fatal flaw” IMO of course.

No mention about impact resistance.

Will using this material inside midframe phones initate commercialization? This could only work with apple/samsung approval...

Thanks for your input and I recall someone talking about automobile wheels way back….but I think we are lacking current unbiased info. Back then the formula was LM105 or its predecessor and the maximum part size was something like a hundred grams or less. That leads me to say nobody actually made a wheel much less tested it. How does a conclusion like that originate.

Why doesn’t someone take a guitar pin or EVIE ring and smash it with a
hammer to see if it shatters….simple test and under a few hundred dollars.

Perhaps beryllium was the culprit ingredient…who knows?

If LL and the Politburo decide to make this a profit center, that could have the positive outcome we are looking for. Until that happens...........

Since you have already concluded all outcomes being negative. Then that leaves no room for discourse.

Not saying your outcomes are wrong from your viewpoint.

It is easy to see the same outcome as you imply from your point of view do nothing and sink slowly or do something and sink quickly.

I just don’t agree with the outcomes of doing something will result in failure.

Remember LQMT was already going south of the border way before LL bought control to profit off of the IP, while throwing them a lifesaver. After that, imo, he has already abandoned ship in deeds not in title.

Here is a link that goes into the issue of being brittle…

https://www.metallurgyfordummies.com/amorphous-metal.html

Good luck to you.

I certainly agree with your observations, but still maintain that this is going nowhere until LL & the Politburo say so. On the other hand If they abandon ship and sell out, where does that leave us? Back to 2010 SOL, or 2016 without the funding or manufacturing. Just rental income and an empty set of desks. To put it another way, if the Chinese interests are not interested in making this a profit center, we are done here. And time kills everything. Including us.

The controversy of LQMT’s material attributed to being brittle is briefly discussed in their design guide 5.0 page 10. I don’t believe it has been updated in five years regarding this issue.

The bottom line is: they seem to gloss over the issue as not being a problem if any exists.

Good luck to you.

Too little, too late. That’s known as closing the barn door after the horses have bolted. Li was in charge and bears ultimate responsibility. Also, did he actually fire anyone or didn’t they get nice golden parachutes while we got nothing. Just like we got nothing while Li arranged a sweetheart deal to unload approximately 180 million shares.

Wrong again! He forgot to resign from LQMT!

The buck does not stop with employees who left the company with parachutes. It should have stopped with LL’s complete resignation from the company and not passed onto his proxies to be controlled having almost zero background in the engineering of the material they are in charge of selling.

Like a (LL) surgeon putting a plumber an electrician and an auto mechanic into a hospital’s operating room to perform life saving open heart surgery.

It wouldn’t have to great of an outcome and the same is not having too good of an outcome for shareholders of LQMT either.

Not at all saying they (the executives) are not trying. Just saying the outcome isn’t going well for the shareholders to survive.

Like on life support until the (shareholders)?patient dies or the plug is pulled.

It’s time and long overdue for LQMT to bring in successful leadership with a clear understanding of the material and a successful history for increasing sales to overcome all of their negative risks and obstacles.

Over the years I’ve heard brittle several times from several people. My clearest recollection was someone saying that Liquidmetal isn’t good for many things you would expect because it has a tendency not to deform but to fail spectacularly. Their example was automotive wheels, which would be an awesome use for a metal that is crazy strong and crazy light. But because they’ll be fine until they shatter in a million pieces the material is unfit for that use. This shook me at the time as that fact would disqualify Liquidmetal from most applications I could think of, including phone bodies. When I’ve mentioned it over the years there has always been some pushback (so FYI it’s not common knowledge). Do you want a screw to sheer, a metal phone case to shatter, a rocket fin to self-disassemble? Is just another weak point (see what I did) for our material. Look, I’m buried in LQMT right now. I bought the shit out of it when it hit 7 cents thinking it’s never been so low this is bottom. Guess I caught a falling knife as they say. So I want this to succeed. BELIEVE ME. But we have some serious downsides to overcome. I’m beyond hopeful that those even more buried in this than me (with tens of millions of shares) will fine the One. True. Use of bmg that will make it nasdaq-worthy and a household name. That it hasn’t happened does not suggest tome that people,aren’t working. It suggests: 1) The lead time for Whales is truly looooooong; and 2) The unique ideal uses of LQMT are feeeeeew.

If plagiarism was worth a dollar you would be a millionaire.

You never have an original thought. Amazing.

Yep and he finally fired all their arses including Paul Hauck.

Nothing great to say about sales as of this past year, but improving.

I sure like the looks of the website though. It is the best of any other ticker I have or have seen.

How does the saying go, " The Emperor Has No Clothes " ?

And who was the CEO while the money was being squandered?  Li!!

You still don’t get it do you, and probably never will.

Erroneous false information.

Li closed shop in the USA because the so called metal expert and staff squandered 30 milllion usd of his investment in lqmt.

Yihao is manufacturing the Evie ring and other parts like guitar pins.

Evidently you are not into facts.

Did you find a list of factors as to why LL in China overcame those same factors?

Didn’t think so.

It’s ok. Just pointing out the excuses for failing to grow the company and the failing to find solutions, where others apparently already have and also pointing out the appearance of conflict of interest by the same influential executive at LQMT and in China.

Now if there actually are no conflicts of interest. Then how is it that amorphous metals of all formulas are growing in revenues significantly and not LQMT?

How is it that (LQMT)they found away not to find a solution to any of those negative risks?

How is it that other executives have to the extent (found a way) that they manufacture their own product or have found away not to sell out their most valuable asset, their IP, where revenues are not significant?

Seems to me that LQMT needs changes at the top to find solutions to increase the line at the bottom,

Good luck to you.

Why would Joshua “clean it up”???

Doing so would expose it for what it is, complete bullshit. A onetime principle of Eontec, Lugee Li, supposedly personally bought a bunch of LQMT stock making himself the CEO. He then shut down LQMT turning it from some innovative manufacturer to just a landlord to it’s former building.

Also, there was some production agreement signed 5 years ago between LQMT and Yihao Metals. But….no production has ever occurred, ever.

There’s your cleaned up MAZE. Any other part of MAZE 2.0 or 3.0 or whatever…. is completely imagined bullshit just like every other supposed inside knowledge crap he brought to this forum.

Just be glad that nonsense is no longer posted here.

Hey folks, listen please. You don't want stainless steel in to space in robotic arms for example. The only way is "dry lubricated" LM106C. You see when gears need oil, it must be capable of handling -100C or below in space 8needs heating and so on). And oil like that meets these requirements nowadays are usually quite poor. Just one example... NASA JPL, Caltech, LM ...and others are doing some amazing things now...China is involved via ownership of the LM company and the results will be quite big...If you buy a diamond cut blade from dollar store does it mean that the whole blade is made of diamond....NO!....sometimes it is enough that the abrasive parts only are made out of the better material....

BRITTLE..I’m not convinced….the first mention a “brittle” came up way back in the early golf years and I think it originated from the name” Bulk Metallic Glass”. Calling it a glass makes it easy to say “it’s prone to shattering”. A very early example of fake news probably coming from a golf club competitor. This goes back 15-18 years so I think we would have heard more if it were true.

There were several academic papers that mentioned possible tendency to break but nothing more than “in passing”

The ability to fragment sounds like a positive for munitions

I think the AI is quoting ancient history just because it found it.

That is exactly what you are doing. So I see some hypocrisy in your post.

Furthermore I have been around lqmt for over 10 years and fully aware of what the issues have been. ChatGPT nailed it!

Those who want to blame management either have an agenda, are bitter, or just clueless that they invested in a material and company that might not see success until the next generation.

don't rely on the maze for accuracy, for sure. the idiot savant needs to clean it up by removing anything other than the materially significant relationships.

only a comment on how silly it is to pin hopes in part on what a bot says.

Liquid Metal does not need to melt in LA, it already has along with everything else going up in smoke.
As for AI. I would expect AI is probably recommending the technology. With the world on the edge of
huge changes going on right now, I would expect the times are riper than ever for something positive
to finally evolve on a larger scale than just rings. Hanging on!

In Space LM106c rules.

All of this is known. Thank you for the review. The concern that exists and is often overlooked are the 100’s of prototypes LQMT has produced where there is a material advantage, which have failed to produce contracts. This fact seems to be a repetitive model for failure.

It would appear many of these prototypes fail to win due to costs and not their unique properties or as stated due to other materials used have a better fit or for both reasons.

LQMT needs to bring in new leadership familiar with metals, and use innovation to change the way they can operate to grow revenues that significantly increase interest and grow shareholder value.

The existing mentality of those who have and are operating the company have proven themselves incapable to date no matter how anyone views them. IMO new leadership is required.

Or as others have suggested perhaps there is an intentional reason, a purposeful reason to surpress competition by the decisions already in effect. We can speculate all day long, but it doesn’t get us any closer to the truth since LQMT also has imo, a lack of communicating between any progress and shareholders after the end of year one way spin.

You look at your investment whenever you bought in and you look at your value today. You look at the ridiculous liquidity trading daily.

Looking at all of the risk factors already known and stated by LQMT are not going to move the company forward or earn one penny. They are just the repetitive reasons to excuse any executives for failing.

As I have posted many times before. Those are not the solutions. Those are the problems that leadership has failed to overcome quarterly and yearly.

Without a successful change to commercialize the material, there is no progress. Just repetitive speculation from all points of views and posts to correct distortions of facts.

Good luck to you.

BRITTLE: Many people have argued about this in the past, but ChatGPT mentioned it again in AT’s post. This makes Liquidmetal a poor choice for many things that cannot be allowed to suddenly fail, like automotive wheels an perhaps phone bodies: “ While liquidmetal has great tensile strength, hardness, and corrosion resistance, it can be more brittle compared to traditional metals, especially at certain temperatures. For products requiring ductility or impact resistance, BMGs may not always be the ideal choice. This has limited their use in certain high-stress applications.
Additionally, while BMGs are strong and wear-resistant, they can be prone to failure under certain conditions (like rapid shock or stress) where metals like steel or titanium might perform better.”

By the way, since you have an in with TC & LL. You know like email and pen pal buddies. Would you mind asking them about that MIM order they hyped on the blog.

You seem to have a knack of getting correspondence. Seems like they respond to serious investors.

Another update from LQMT …

https://www.liquidmetal.com/blog/md-m-west-anaheim-convention-center-2025

Guess everyone missed this one.

And all should also be apprised of the success in attracting new potential customers.

IMO, another example of a company… you can fill in the rest…

By the way, anyone know what happened with that MIM order LQMT posted last summer?

Keeping shareholders in the dark. Sort of like bashing the shareholder.

It’s not hitting the 0.03’s on emotions or anyone’s opinions based on unfounded emotions or agendas no matter what you believe.

It is hitting the 0.03’s on facts of performance and failures to overcome that bashing negative post of facts and speculation you posted. In essence on diversion from the truth.

You can’t report success abroad and attribute the success to same person LL, and not attribute the same person who is the former ceo and present cob of Liquidmetal for it’s failures today.

IMO, that defines the definition of hypocritical.
Nope, that post was indeed sent to the right person and spot on too.

There are factual reasons for hitting the 0.03’s and anemic volumes too embarrassing to mention. None of which has anything to do with anyone’s opinions! IMO, that’s based on some form of unfounded fears or other motives that are way out of my pay grade to even opine on.

Did you find a list of factors as to why LL in China overcame those same factors?

After all of your DD, do you really think you have to look beyond the same risks clearly pointed out by LQMT in their filed documents?

If China is grossing millions or a few million and is purportedly investing over $10 million in amorphous metal infrastructure. Then it’s not any longer all of those risk factors that is the problem. Otherwise, Everyone had better sell no matter what views anyone has. Because, it doesn’t look like the present executive team based on the many many years of experience is the solution, regardless of there competency or incompetence.

Great executives know how to market and communicate and commercialize a material or product from a cabbage patch doll to a drip percolator. From a widget to a liquid bandaid.

My point of view is and has been very simple since I’m a very simple person and without any of the bullshit of pros and cons.

My point of view requires no high school diploma.
It’s simply this; If LL can do it in China. LL can do it in the USA.

The only outside chance of that ever happening now might be based on how much of a demand will exist in the USA and how high will the tariffs be on China to export to make it worthwhile to build a plant here in the USA.

I have mentioned the last point of view, when Donald Trump won the November 5th election to become the 47th, President. When that happens all of those risk factors except for newer materials goes away.

Good luck to you.

That’s a post for Bravara1. Read a little more carefully and you will figure it out.

So did I. But the bashers don’t care about truth and reality. They are led by emotions and other motives.

So, how badly did Li screw over the shareholders when he sold almost 170 million shares for 16 cents when the share price was sitting in the 4s?  Today's volume was less than 20,000.  It would take 8,950 trading days to buy 179,000,000 shares at todays volume.  The only way to acquire the 179,000,000 shares in a reasonable period of time is to offer more than 4 cents.  There is no way of telling where the share price would be today if Li hadn't taken care of himself first.

That’s an interesting observation. However, I doubt the new AI advanced BMG technology is part of the cross licensing agreement with Eontec. So how does LQMT (and equally important, we shareholders) benefit from it?

Are you imagining where ChatGPT or LQMT will be in 10 years? LOL

Issues of truth and bad behavior are pretty much exposed on this board, amongst the the long term posters. So, taking each post as a zero sum game makes little sense to me. Res Ipsa Loquitor.

Does anyone see any relativity with DeepSeek? Be it the Maze of our 'partners' or the AI robotics, and our pockets? I do not, but just thought to query the board.

Finally a voice of reason on this board. Thank you!

Now listen, folks. LQMT could be heading for something huge—really huge. China’s got a stake, and that means big opportunities, big markets. AI has been in active development over there, making things faster, smarter, bigger—maybe the best it’s ever been. Investors are watching closely, and some say it could be a game-changer. Could be very exciting, folks. Are we about to stop talking grams and start talking kilograms? Very exciting. God bless.

"reality of my factual posts"

FYI: LMFAO

I found ChatGPT’s list of potential factors affecting LQMT’s inability to recruit users to be very complete. If only it had defined a path forward I would be even more impressed. Just imagine where it will be in 10 years!

Believe me it’s not hitting the 0.03’s on emotions!.

And you won’t get that kind of analysis from copy and waste.