"Chance favors the prepared mind"-Louis Pasteur

Its been quite a while since I have really had time to sit down and put words on a page. I do attempt at least every few days to read a few posts and get a feel for what the emotional quotient is, or is not.

Certainly theres not very much I can add in terms of content that an already stellar cast of characters and talents on the board, have already added. Preferably I want not to rehash and recycle, I do want to take a fresh look at an old subject that I feel can prepare us for some of whats to come. That subject would or may entail a halt, and a release of a significant material change news release. The contents of which and possible structure we could expect to see.

In keeping on a positive note, I get the feeling that 2016 is going to change some of our sentiments towards the long struggle we have all had.

Something I would like to bring forth to the discussion as a exhibit A. It was forwarded to me in an email communication a couple of days ago. It came along with a set of interesting questions, and actually is what compelled me to put together this post. I responded the sender asking if I could use their email content as a basis for a post to the forum, and was given approval. The email centered around a technology news release a few days previous. The person that sent it to me had done an analysis of its contents such as grammar, inflections, and overall message. Then asking me to use my marketing and communications background to do the same to see if we could compare notes. The news release was interesting in itself, the wording or strategic placement of the wording in it, was even more interesting.

In the year and one half since joining this forum, I have tried to keep to what I know, and impart only what I could based on my experiences. I have tried to extrapolate and not speculate as much as possible. I am now thinking that our speculation time will be coming to an end in 2016 and a reliable and fact based discussion on topical news, can begin. Certainly, my one and only advantage here is in being able to make calls to consult expertise in the technology at hand and the periphery industries. Your hub leaders, on the other hand, have that wonderful and voluminous acumen and expertise specific to our situation. We are very lucky to have this asset on the forum. My background is in business, manufacturing and marketing within the technology industry. So I have mostly attempted to keep within that sphere. So Fan Out Interposers aside, I will continue to try and be current and connective in my content.

----------------------INTERMISSION--------------------

You, I, we, have discussed a cornucopia of subjects, including and not limited to stealth periods, black outs, security, NDA's, and myriad related subjects. I have also stated on a few occasions, the vague and nebulous assertion to (on purpose), expect the unexpected. In this vein, I can say that this industry has a few common threads and effective business processes running through it. You may not like or appreciate this, however deception is one large component of those threads. Now when I say the word, I mean it in an honest way. Its a tool that is critical to the success of many organizations, like start ups for example. Its a constant way of business to others, like a fruit company we all know of.

Without an ironclad example in hand, we discussed a few times about how (and when) a crtitical NR when released will be worded (or what would it say ?) Will it be clear and concise or sly and deceptive or a happy medium ? Will it appease the market, the shareholders, the new buyer ? All these are valid considerations and as we approach the inevitable date of a major release in 2, 3, 6 months ?, we should look at all angles in play.

Therefore, I present to you, a discussion on information management, controlling the message until you want it left........uncontrolled. Saying what can be said...but what interests me is how they say what can't be said.

Am I making any sense ?........................................

From the release.....

XXXXXXX AND XXXXXX........have signed a research, development and royalty agreement with a Fortune 500 manufacturer. Initially, the agreement encompasses the development of multiphased deliverables over the course of the next 12 months.

For competitive reasons and pursuant to confidentiality clauses contained with the agreement, neither specific research objectives nor the identity of the agreement partner can be publicly disclosed. Upon successful completion of the research phase, and subject to approval by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration, the developed materials will become a part of a consumer retail product.....

So a quick analysis........................

The company and its subsidiary are named. A tech related company. An R & D component, along with royalties with a big name company. Obvious to us and mentioned is the confidentiality of the nuts and bolts. Not surprising ? A term of 12 months is mentioned and could we consider this as an exclusivity clue and clause ? Further to the 12 months datum, nothing said vis a vis updates at intervals within that 12 months. Interesting as that is the next paragraph gives you a clue as to how clandestine the developed product(s) are. Sound familiar ? A 3rd party inspections component is included and to be implemented most likely concurrently with the product development to expedite the time line. It sounds and reads like they are in a rush to get whatever it is to market. Overall, its well written and cohesive and informative. Yet still deceptive enough for their own purposes.

So you can see here, a seemingly simple ? ......and possibly consumable product ?, a delicate and clandestine developmental period. Speaks volumes, and at the same time, does not. A little speculation is needed or required by the reader to fill in the prospective blanks. This is the nature of the business. You have to read between the lines and make up your own mind. For example, are the time lines as posted going to end up factual ? Or wll they "under promise and over deliver" ? .......So is this bad ?

Short answer.....no, its not bad, in fact, its voluminous in its information quota. Its information is well appointed and one can speculate rather safely at this point that they will be bringing a product to market.

NOW,.......before any of the sirens go off. I am certainly not saying that once PTK has its ducks in a row and its dotted lines signed and sealed, that there won't be any full disclosure. On the contrary I would think that they would want to trumpet it to the world. What I am saying, is this would be the next logical step forward, covering both buyer and seller.

It could also be seen as a similar type of release, either in the interim or beginning of a run of news releases and/or promo campaign. It would cover (safely for all parties) a progressive development such as product placement, a revenue based situation, or step progressive in the product developments history, really skies the limit as to content. In my view, it would be an all good and very positive stepping stone.

In the case of an extreme and monumental development.......well....lets just wait and see.

2016 seems to be the year of the "N".....NRE.....NASDAQ.....ReveNue....DisruptioN

The next question is..................wheN ?

Source.....(Thanks go to the submitter)

http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/graphene-3d-lab-announces-rd-royalty-agreement-with-a-fortune-500-manufacturer-559478451.html