Equedia Letter

Almost Home: NexOptic’s Blade Optics Flat Lens Prototype Nears Completion13 min read

Comments (7)
  1. Brett says:

    I love your letter! But you missed the boat re: Musk and Tesla. If you count energy generation, the all electric car is not
    a real benefit (not to mention limited mileage). Additionally, Musk owns Tesla, Solar City and Space X – these all require huge capital inputs. Space X doesn’t provide financials. Tesla and Solar City are hyped but with flawed models. A recent
    newsletter from Stansberry Research did an in depth analysis of Tesla and Solar City plus all the supporting government subsidies and even discussed future obsolence of electric auto technology, solar panel tech, battery storage/technology, etc.
    The end result was a recommendation to short both Tesla and Solar City.
    You can obtain this outstanding analysis from Stansberry Research and I think it debunks all the hype.
    Thank you for your excellent newsletter.

    1. Ivan Lo says:

      Thanks Brett. The point of this Letter was not to say that Tesla is a BUY, but to emphasize that patience is a key investment attribute that should not be overlooked – especially when investing in potentially game-changing technology such as Tesla in its early days, or NexOptic today.

      Hope this clarifies things!

      Thanks for your loyal readership,
      Ivan

  2. Ray says:

    Thanks for the update on this technology. It still puzzles me why the technology company is being synergized with a Vancouver based former mining company. If promotion is the name of the game then “pump and dump” also comes to mind. Hope I’m wrong?

  3. Dave says:

    I am interested in NexOptic, but am also concerned that it may be a scam. Under “IP” they list a couple patent attorneys, and claim filing of a single provisional patent. What kind of protection is that if this is really as big as you tease? The parent company appears to be a failed mining company from Vancouver (which is loaded with failed miners, i.e., shells). They claim “the Company” discovered a new technology but they never name the individual(s) responsible or their bios.

    Much of their promotion seems to be “Fame by Association”, including their attorneys, a couple consultants, and Ruda Cardinal. They claim that Ruda is building a “Proof of Concept” telescope for them, and they offer specs such as dimensions and weight, but never address magnification. Who would be interested in a telescope without knowing its magnification?

    Is there any public documentation that Ruda Cardinal has in fact have validated the NexOptic claims and is in fact constructing a POC telescope for them that will be completed in the near future. (When, & what magnification?)

    Thank you very much. I am an impoverished retiree who could really use a decent stock investment, but I sure don’t need to be taken to the cleaners (again).

    1. Ivan Lo says:

      Hi Ray and Dave,

      Thanks for your comments and questions.

      I understand how a technology such as this may be construed the wrong way.

      On the one hand, it is an extremely ground-breaking technology; on the other, the market may have a hard time believing it because it is so groundbreaking.

      The Company currently has filed a “root” patent, and is in the process of filing others. I have personally met the individuals who discovered this technology and one of them is John Daugela – an extremely bright man.

      As far as fame by association, Ruda Cardinal was the one that completed the Trade Study in February 2016, and this was addressed in a public news release. In terms of validation of NexOptic claims, Ruda Cardinal was actually the one conducting the trade study, so the claims are directly from Ruda Cardinal.

      Furthermore, the Government of Canada has supported this technology on numerous occasions by funding the Company, and Alberta Innovates Technology Futures (AITF) has invited and has co-hosted Spectrum as part of a contingent of small and medium sized Alberta technology firms to attend the summit. In fact, some of the early work was done with Alberta Centre for Advanced MNT Products, at their facilities.

      Now in terms of magnification, this is where it gets tricky – especially since most of us are not optics engineers.

      Magnification is a combination of a lot of things including Equivalent Focal Length and Field of View. NexOptic has eluded to a narrow field of view, so I would assume that the magnification would be quite high, since the higher your magnification, the smaller the field of view will be.

      Furthermore, magnification may also change depending on the eye piece used, which judging by the previous press release on the ability for the POC prototype to allow for industry standard CMount and/or CS-Mount cameras and devices, that too could change.

      I hope this helps.

      I am sure you’re not the only one asking these types of questions, so thank you for asking. I believe that is why the market cap is where it is today – its a hard concept for people to grasp: they can’t see it, touch it, or feel it – yet its revolutionary, a first of its kind.

      But that is precisely what makes speculating so rewarding. Is there risk? Yes. But to me, at a market cap of barely C$13 million, the potential reward is worth the risk.

      Thanks again for your questions and your readership!
      Ivan

  4. Björn says:

    Hi

    I google Flat Lens and was soon to find these two prototypes of flat lenses, so why is Nextoptics so special since all three are developing flat lenses?
    http://www.innovationtoronto.com/2016/02/a-flat-optical-lens-just-a-billionth-of-a-metre-thick-promises-to-revolutionize-much-of-the-technology-around-us/ and. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36438686

    There seems to be a lid on the share price at 35-37, whom is selling now? 37 seems to have indefinite numbers of shares since new shares keep on showing as soon as they are bought.

    1. Ivan Lo says:

      Great questions!

      The biggest difference is that these “new” techonlogies use what are called “metamaterials.” As I mentioned, these are not commercial off the shelf solutions (COTS) – in other words, we are likely many, many years away from that type of product to reach the hands of a consumer. Nano-optics are not new and have been in existence since for some time now – but they are unrealistic for consumer use in the near term and have yet to proven scalability.

      NXO’s technology, on the other hand, uses COTS materials and thus can be rapidly deployed to existing imaging systems.

      Hope this answers your questions!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.