Equedia Letter

NexOptic Technology Corp: A Revolutionary Flat Lens System15 min read

Comments (34)
  1. dave says:

    Hello Mr Lo,
    Many thanks for the early word on Nexoptics. I’ve traded the stock 8 or 9 times since I first owned it in the mid .50’s. The last time trade was a buy at 1.15 on Friday after the pullback from 1.32. I had sold at 1.28 earlier and gathered my profits again from this great stock.
    I believe it’s time to start accumulating a greater share of my position as a long-term investment and just trade 25% or so. Is this a good idea?
    Thanks as well for ICG and ML.V. (will Millenium come back to life?)
    All the best,
    Dave in Toronto

    1. Equedia says:

      Sorry for the late reply Dave. I cannot comment on how you should trade or invest but I can tell you that I am a long term believer in their technology. I have met the guys behind the project and they are an amazing group of extremely hardworking, talented, and friendly people. I believe in them in very much.

      I do, however, always suggest to take risk off the table as necessary – especially if you’re in the money. Perhaps I should take my own advice here, but its hard to when I truly believe they are changing the world. I own a very large position.

      Thanks for being a loyal reader.

    2. Dennis says:

      The Agenda is transparent. NEXOPTICS, INC.

      California Secretary Of State Business Registration · Updated 1/12/2017

      Nexoptics, Inc. is a California Domestic Corporation filed on September 2, 2005 . The company’s filing status is listed as Suspended and its File Number is C2802764.

      The Registered Agent on file for this company is Kyong Chan Lim and is located at 13110 Sunstone Pointe, San Diego, CA 92130. The company’s mailing address is 13110 Sunstone Pointe, San Diego, CA 92130.

      The company has 1 principal on record. The principal is Kyong Chan Lim from San Diego CA.

      1. Equedia says:

        NexOptic Technology Corp. is a Company registered in Canada – not in California.

      2. DE Larsen says:

        Dennis: Sorry, you have the wrong company.

  2. Ralph Bruns Sr says:

    Looks darn good, not with standing Military Applications. I put in an order For Monday morning.
    Thanks

  3. Michael says:

    I have a question, maybe someone more knowledgable than me can answer:
    The article – or actually the pr – stated that “the diffraction limit of the nominal system is approximately 17um (micrometers) while still maintaining the approximate five-inch depth of the overall POC device.”

    Can anyone help me: To me it seems that 17um is a really bad value, especially for an aperture opening that wide? Todays consumer camera sensors have a pixel size of somewhere between 2 to 8 um (depending on sensor size and megapixels). The POC scope has a c-mount camera attached. Typical image circle on that mount is 20mm. A camera with a square 20mm x 20mm sensor and 17um pixel pitch would have a whopping 1,3 Megapixels (1176×1176 pixels). That is just not enough for todays standards, and possibly much less than the human eye could resolve, if an eyepiece were attached to the c-mount instead of a camera sensor. The image would be just not sharp.
    Now, that size is still very impressive. But it means that the technology still has a long way to go before it can compete with todays optics in terms of performance.
    Where am I wrong?

  4. Bo Chew says:

    NXO Launch

  5. Mark Daugela says:

    Hello Michael,
    The diffraction limit is a clarity measurement – relating to light “spreading” that is only a function of the optics definitely not related to pixels in the sensor. .I suspect you are mismatching image clarity, pixelation concepts, lens aberration and brightness concepts… Any sensor available now, or in the future will fit with blade optics technology, and into a smaller space. A key problem in quantifying image clarity is that flat lens sometimes do not fit into circular formulas (i.e. f-stop) … the proof of concept could have been made to completely utilize all of the light captured in a blade optic lens for any rectangular ratio for any sensor such as 16:9 or 4:3, etc. However, a circular lens must waste some of its circular inbound light while reshaping to fit a rectangular sensor shape (see earlier video). No lens, whether flat or curved, directly cause pixelation issues, but yes the circular lenses constrain pixelation of the sensor according to the amount of useful light captured. Typically more light is preferable for long distances, improving HDR and contrast, and to improving the sensor processing speed and/or getting more pixels per square inch. Thus I personally anticipate that blade lenses will allow more pixels than circular lenses. I personally expect because of blade lenses we may in the near future see less single sensor technology because it will allow dual, or quad sensors configurations into a more compact form. My understanding is that the ~4 inchx4 inch POC is reportedly good compared to a 5 inch x 39-inch telescope Likewise any electronic sensor (CMOS or other) can fit into the production models if desired. I will be going to the unveiling of the POC. You may find information to improve your understanding by googling “Abbe number”, or look at http://www.edmundoptics.com/resources/application-notes/imaging/diffraction-limit/, and especially refer to the Nexoptic powerpoint for more details. Cheers, Mark .

    1. Equedia says:

      Thank you Mark for the detailed and superb explanation. The more information we have for the people, the better.

      When you create something that people say can’t be done, you make history.

      That’s precisely what I believe the team at NexOptic are doing. Up until the prototype launch, skeptics will remain skeptics.

      It certainly helps to have educated and thoughtful answers to difficult questions.

      Thank you.

  6. Travis Lane says:

    NXO Launch

  7. Ganja Man says:

    Can we get sample picture of Jupiter and maybe Andromeda? Before I invest – I want to see what it produces.

    1. Bigman says:

      By the time you get to see those pictures be ready to pay a lot more for that stock. Good luck

  8. Aaron Weinberg says:

    Hello Ivan,
    I am a long time subscriber to your letter, and I do appreciate your letter, and I have profited from your advice in the past.
    I actually once sent you an email, and you were kind enough to answer me.
    I have been following your comments regarding Nexoptic, and have purchased shares a while ago, and then again, more recently based on your good advice.
    I have also passed on this suggestion to a lot of my friends.
    I am now beginning to panic a little, as this stock now has become a very sizable percentage of my portfolio.
    As well, Mr.Armstrong has just sold 90,000 shares this past week. As an insider, why would he sell now, if he believed that the stock would shortly go up very significantly, why would he not wait to sell a little later?
    Could you please reassure me that from your vantage point, things are progressing properly. Maybe another update in your weekly letter would be an important help to a lot of us?
    Thanking you in advance,
    Aaron Weinberg

    1. Equedia says:

      Sorry for the late reply Aaron.

      While I can’t tell you how to invest, I do understand and appreciate your concern.

      What I can tell you is that people – mostly on billboards or stock message boards – get carried away when they’re not sure what’s happening. They speculate so much that their speculation turns into paranoia.

      Perhaps that’s normal for speculative investments – after all, the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward if things work out.

      As for Armstrong’s position, I can’t for sure tell you why he sold as I have not spoken to him. My belief is that he is selling to excercise some early warrants that will expire in a few months. If I am right, his sales are normal, natural, and will contribute to funding the Company. Lastly, his sales are quite small considering he is one of the Company’s largest shareholders and likely owns millions of shares.

      If he decided to sell millions of shares, then perhaps it may cause me to wonder. At the same time, we all invest to make money, which means we all have to eventually sell if we want to reap the rewards.

      Lastly, if Armstrong knew something that we did not – such as potential issues with the prototype – and he sold, he would be selling based on insider information. That would be illegal. Given Armstrong runs a very prominent law practice, I highly doubt he would let that happen over such a small amount of stock sale.

      I hope this helps. Don’t hesistate to call the Company direct with your concerns – they are great people and they value every one of their shareholders.

  9. Tony Evans says:

    Nxo launch

  10. a w says:

    Hi Ivan,
    Would it be possible to write a little follow up tomorrow as to what is happening at NXO. We are all a little jittery considering the speed of the upward move.Should we be holding or selling.Do you have anymore news as to when they are going to make their announcement?Do you have any idea if there will be a delay, or if things are still on the original schedule, We could really use some direction. Thanks for your help.

    1. Equedia says:

      Hi AW,

      Thanks for your comment. While I can’t comment on what you should do with your stock due to legalities, I do believe the Company’s guidance hasn’t changed as far as I am aware.

      I still believe they will unveil the launch of their prototype sometime in Q1 – which would mean anytime between now and the end of March.

      I’ve been a shareholder for more than a couple of years now, so I certainly share your excitement.

      I, too, cannot wait for the launch.

      Hope this helps,
      Ivan

  11. Bigman says:

    You said in less than 60 days the world will know do you know when the exact date is when this news will be revealed to the world ? thanks BIGMAN

    1. Equedia says:

      Hi,

      Sorry, I only know that it should be sometime before the end of Q1, based on the Company’s guidance.

      Hope this helps,
      Ivan

      1. Bigman says:

        Yes thank you very helpful BIGMAN.

  12. CLYDE says:

    I’m holding on to this to the end….
    I’ts all the savings I had so my heart races every time the
    stock goes down….although going up was nice….

    LET US SEE THIS THING “Working” .

    I’t not just the stock ……it’s having and being part of this thing…

    Thanks Ivan for everything.

    Just a particle of space wanting to belong.

  13. Jason Gorrie says:

    New subscriber. Great article. I got in at .18 then doubled up at .32. Would really like to attend the launch April 4th

  14. Brad Francis says:

    wht’s the easiest way to buy into this? exciting, even though i’m not a stock player. I like the story so far…..

    1. Equedia says:

      Hi Brad,

      The Company trades on the Canadian stock exchange TSX Venture under the symbol NXO and on in the US under the symbol NXOPF.

      Hope this helps.

      1. Mike says:

        Why would NOX and NXOPF values differ from each other when they are the same company? Also would it be possible for one of the stocks but not the other to skyrocket?

        Thank

        MA

        1. Jerry says:

          US Dollars vs. Canadian Dollars.

  15. Brad Francis says:

    see the above comment….

  16. Miguel Frankel says:

    Hi,
    I just looked at your upper 4.13 minute video which contains 6 minor videos.
    One of them is about an ultra thin flat lens developed by a University of Utah profesor
    Rajesh Menon.
    What is this? Is it the same lens? Is it a competitor? Are there other similar
    developments advacing simultaneasly?
    Thanks for the info.
    Best
    MF

  17. FRED says:

    Mr. Ho – can u explain what the difference between Nexoptic & the flat lense system described within this Lin ?

    http://m.caltech.edu/news/future-flat-lenses-53375

  18. Jimmy W Vick says:

    You should give me the best telescope you can produce for free, I have given so much and have nothing… i assure you it will be put to good use and a more than fair evaluation given…. Thanks… btw the unified field for gravitation and electormagnetism is r = 2Ghv/c(log) where v = 0. And space itself is programming time by generating a frequency… Had Galileo been poor, would you have given him a telescope?

  19. Daniel says:

    Can u explain what the difference between Nexoptic & the flat lense system designed at Caltech.

    http://www.caltech.edu/news/future-flat-lenses-53375

  20. Rick Kosolofski says:

    I am curious why so many articles as of late about this whole thing being a scam? There are some big red flags showing up in these articles such as the picture of the tree in the back yard being copied from a back yard blog and the involvement of the folks from Pinnacle research (another investment newsletter) shared office with NXO. Lack of photos made available to the public? Caltech flat lense which sounds like the same thing? Most of the directors of the company come from the mining industry and have affiliations with many other mining companies, many of which have history on the venture exchange? The biggest red flag is insiders selling just before the big unveiling event. The recent negative articles state many facts that unless proven otherwise will erode any investor confidence, certainly eroding mine! I have been a reader of Equedia for many years and have seen mixed results from companies promoted. I would like to think we are getting the real deal?

    1. Ivan says:

      Hi Rick,

      As I recently mentioned in the latest newsletter, these reports are collaborated by short sellers. There is a reason they are written under Pseudonyms, and written in a way where there is no positivity.

      For example, the picture of a tree was just that, a stock photo. We use many stock photos to illustrate our story – we never said the picture was a picture from John’s backyard. See how easily people can skew words into something negative?

      Furthermore, people share offices all the time. That doesn’t mean its a negative thing.

      Lack of photos: I believe the Company will release more. But they know the tech works, and are advancing it. They’re not here to take pictures – that’s not their business.

      Caltech flat lens: completely different. Caltech uses metasurfaces, which is far from conventional. Please see the original report.

      As far as insiders selling – it’s really only been ONE insider who has sold stock before the event and it was a small position considering how much stock he owns.

      Lastly, our performance has been quite good. The article, in order to paint a negative picture, failed to mention all of our wins – including NMI which was bought out for over $5, which we introduced at $0.82 a year before. It failed to mention many, many other of our wins.

      I can’t tell you what the Company should be worth in terms of valuation, but the tech is the real deal.

      I hope you can see how one-sided the short reports were and why they are all released in relative succession.

      Again, the shorts want people to sell stock so they can buy it back – they release negative reports and nothing positive comes from it.

      For example, the whole thing on aberrations is simply stupid. EVERY lens has them, including curved. It’s how people correct them that makes them work.

      Take a look at this:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkBOsTVfpdA&t=321s

      I believe the shorts will continue to attack the share price – but we should look at it from a positive light. It gives others an opportunity to buy stock at cheaper prices if they feel the tech is undervalued.

Leave a Reply

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