These guys are masters of ambiguity. Many believers will assume this means the top 3 companies  (likely AVX, Vishay, and Kemet) have received samples, are excited about it, and are anxious to get a license. Lets call them generically, “AVK”

a. For long term vendor relationships, trust is a key. If, for example, if DuPont came out with an improved coating material, they contact the cognizant engineer they worked with before. Samples are freely sent, no great paperwork involved, an the new material is evaluated versus the old.

 

b. For new suppliers of already used materials, there is a higher participation level, the engineering head, and sometimes a simple NDA. That typically includes a promise that they won’t disclose they are working with “AVK”, that would seem like an endorsement.

 

c. Now for key competitive materials, it gets complicated. First, unsolicited samples are sent back. Everyone knows of stories where unscrupulous “vendors” sue major companies for using their ideas. Second; the decision goes to a company officer. Then, if approved, and an investigation of the “vendor” shows integrity in the past, a “Dual NDA” is executed, the key part is that neither party reveals publicly the evaluation in progress, and the customer will not analyze or dissect the product.

 

 

Now, you will note, that unlike FD’s comments, EEStore has not admitted samples were sent. It’s unlikely they would have been accepted, as explained above. The whole process can take a year, and require several exchanges, and sometimes a new configuration.

 

So, the “negotiations” may simply mean they were trying to arrange a meeting with the technical director. (Unlikely, given their history, in my opinion.)