ASAM
ASSURANCEAMERICA
stock OTC

>How are you calculating OPEX? Your $69M number for Q1 through Q3 seems high to me.
I made the sum of expenses for R&D and SG&A for each quarter. In millions:
Q1: 12.692 + 8.737 = 21.429
Q2: 13.851 + 9.692 = 23.543
Q3: 15.584 + 8.743 = 24.327
For a total of 69.299.

I'm not an accountant so I'm not convinced this is correct, just sharing what I did to get to this number.
​
>What type of entity do you believe took advantage of Microvision? And how do you purport they did it? I'm not saying your wrong, I just want to understand your thinking.
I don't know who or how. I decide to spend my own time on things other than deep technical stock market dynamics, and as a result of this decision I don't understand what happened. For what it is worth, here is my thinking:
On the 11th of May a historic and to me inexplainable month-long rise in stock price started. On the 13th of June, a large investment bank convinced MicroVision to be the lead book-running manager for a new public offering *on top* of the already open ATM at that time. This was followed by a dramatic decline in stock price and their withdrawal as a result, followed by a further decline. MicroVision ended up with roughly the same market cap as it started with, but is tagged with 'unreliable' in the investment banker world ever since. All of this reeks of manipulation in one form or another, but feel free to categorize this one as 'unprofessional gut' ;)
​
>I am certainly not 100% positive regarding the ability to plug and play any LiDAR hardware with a perception system.
This would depend heavily on the output format of the LiDAR hardware. Thinking about it a bit more, even without talking about perception, just taking the raw point cloud and outputting it in bits and bytes, there's a lot of variables here of which I can imagine affect compatibility with the thing that needs to do the interpreting. Just following the rules of a format like JSON gives a lot of freedom in terms of how to package information. I am curious to know how MicroVision decides to tackle this interpretation problem without the help of the designers of these sensors (its competitors). On the face of it, this looks to be a problem to solve for both MOSAIK and sensor fusion.
​
>However, with the introduction of a standard, it may be possible in the future.
You may be correct that there *is* no standard for point cloud output at this moment. At least I didn't manage to find such standard online. If this is the case, either an independent third party comes up with a standard or the eventual market leader(s) will be the ones allowed to force whatever they decided on to the others.
At least for data output there seem to be general agreed upon standards like [ASAM OpenDRIVE](https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/opendrive/).

>How are you calculating OPEX? Your $69M number for Q1 through Q3 seems high to me.
I made the sum of expenses for R&D and SG&A for each quarter. In millions:
Q1: 12.692 + 8.737 = 21.429
Q2: 13.851 + 9.692 = 23.543
Q3: 15.584 + 8.743 = 24.327
For a total of 69.299.

I'm not an accountant so I'm not convinced this is correct, just sharing what I did to get to this number.
​
>What type of entity do you believe took advantage of Microvision? And how do you purport they did it? I'm not saying your wrong, I just want to understand your thinking.
I don't know who or how. I decide to spend my own time on things other than deep technical stock market dynamics, and as a result of this decision I don't understand what happened. For what it is worth, here is my thinking:
On the 11th of May a historic and to me inexplainable month-long rise in stock price started. On the 13th of June, a large investment bank convinced MicroVision to be the lead book-running manager for a new public offering *on top* of the already open ATM at that time. This was followed by a dramatic decline in stock price and their withdrawal as a result, followed by a further decline. MicroVision ended up with roughly the same market cap as it started with, but is tagged with 'unreliable' in the investment banker world ever since. All of this reeks of manipulation in one form or another, but feel free to categorize this one as 'unprofessional gut' ;)
​
>I am certainly not 100% positive regarding the ability to plug and play any LiDAR hardware with a perception system.
This would depend heavily on the output format of the LiDAR hardware. Thinking about it a bit more, even without talking about perception, just taking the raw point cloud and outputting it in bits and bytes, there's a lot of variables here of which I can imagine affect compatibility with the thing that needs to do the interpreting. Just following the rules of a format like JSON gives a lot of freedom in terms of how to package information. I am curious to know how MicroVision decides to tackle this interpretation problem without the help of the designers of these sensors (its competitors). On the face of it, this looks to be a problem to solve for both MOSAIK and sensor fusion.
​
>However, with the introduction of a standard, it may be possible in the future.
You may be correct that there *is* no standard for point cloud output at this moment. At least I didn't manage to find such standard online. If this is the case, either an independent third party comes up with a standard or the eventual market leader(s) will be the ones allowed to force whatever they decided on to the others.
At least for data output there seem to be general agreed upon standards like [ASAM OpenDRIVE](https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/opendrive/).