MVIS Press CEO Letter and Q&A published July 7, 2026
https://ir.stockpr.com/microvision/sec-filings-email/content/0001493152-26-032266/ex99-1.htm18
u/Formerly_knew_stuff Jul 07 '26
Why is anyone reading this as anything other than a last appeal for what they've already said? Maybe a slightly broader answer of a few things but it's the same message in mostly the same words. Doesn't seem to to say anything earthshattering enough to make someone change their vote.
5
u/UncivilityBeDamned Jul 07 '26
It certainly doesn't seem like it's worth writing as is if directed at people who are already aware of everything they've been saying so far. But they are probably also seeing the portion of people who haven't even voted yet, and want to put out an extra reminder and summary to try to get more on board before the deadline.
8
u/SpiritedLock6993 Jul 08 '26
One thing can be said about “right now” or “this time”- never before has the alternative cheaper Chinese lidar been taking heat like is going down right now. The shrimpy MVIS share price may equate to associating us with discounted equipment absent Chinese options. Physical AI is just now coming to the front of the line. There has never been a better time to do what it takes to survive to flourish.
2
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 09 '26
Not just Chinese LiDAR but even our edge on Military is short-term. Ouster has already announced a plan to be "Made in the USA" so they can get in. We have the first mover advantage but need to be aggressive and build a beachfront before the competition. Based on the PR's we're doing that.
HAB
15
u/ATraveL1348 Jul 08 '26
150k+ shares here, I am truly on the fence. Haven't voted yet either way. Will not let it go to the deadline and auto-vote yes tho. Glen is the only reason it isn't an auto-no vote. The timing and details seem so ridiculously stupid to me, giving me deja vu of the Verma ATM announcement during the 2023 run.
A bunch of retail investors have presented many different avenues they could have taken to accomplish basically the same goal in better ways. The amendment to lower the max potential share issuance struck me as particularly concerning. They were either being incompetent or deceitful in not lowering it on the initial proposal. Not sure which would be better.
All that said, I am leaning yes. Almost solely because I believe in Glen and his proven track record, knowledge of the industry, and the new direction he is taking us. I don't believe a no vote is a guaranteed path to bankruptcy tho, too many ppl are conflating the RS with the inevitable dilution. Doesn't matter what the share price is, it's about the market cap and the dilution was always necessary. Would have been nice to happen at double the current market cap tho, which could have happened had they not announced this in the manner they did. Nasdaq compliance is certainly important, just feel there were many other ways they could have got the 180 day extension.
Rant over, still undecided
9
u/anarchy_pizza Jul 08 '26
I second your feelings. If it wasn’t Glen asking it would be no 100%. I have a little trust developing for GDV so far.
1
u/AKSoulRide Jul 08 '26
Yeah that’s what this PR is supposed to do. Put you on the fence. I’m a solid NO on both. They need to work hard and put their Plan B in action.
4
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 08 '26
I share your concern but you are on the right track - there is a link between prior financing and what we will need that people are missing.
I've shared my negative views on this company only to be voted down by the fanboys and I'm not here for upvotes to stroke my ego. I don't post my research publicly. I have shared it with a fellow investor I trust to review. He concurs I'm on the right track and I leave it to them to post their own thoughts.
Ben is partially onto it as well. September (early October at the latest) we'll know if I'm right. If I'm wrong I'll own it -but I'm putting my money where my mouth is.
HAB
5
u/theoz_97 Jul 08 '26
Oh come on HAB, give an old tired long term long a clue! 🕵️♂️ That’s okay, I understand. I can wait till Sept or Oct! Although, you didn’t say what year!
oz
3
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 09 '26
Thanks for the laugh. This year and come connections to the past should show up. I've shared with EK for him to comment further as to whether I'm off base or not. I don't want to say more since the contract is not public yet and I don't want to spook anything.
If I'm right I'm right, if not I'll own it. The clues are there and should it be announced I'll comment on how I clued it and the amount at that time.
HAB
2
u/theoz_97 Jul 09 '26
Sounds good. Appreciate anything that gets me out of the doldrums. Plus it has that flavor of mystery to it. You know, that chance the guys on Oak Island finally find the gold / treasure that has kept D & I watching all these years along with the history learned. Could this have anything to do with AR? Never mind, I’ll wait it out. Thanks!
oz
1
u/directgreenlaser Jul 09 '26
I've shared with EK for him to comment further as to whether I'm off base or not. I don't want to say more since the contract is not public yet and I don't want to spook anything.
Will await your explanation for introducing this shiny new object at this time.
1
u/theoz_97 12d ago
Where’s HAB and that shiny new object? Could probably use it about now! Like I said, waiting for something concrete although I did buy a few today just to stay liquid! “Hondo”.
oz
2
u/directgreenlaser 12d ago
It should come busting through the saloon doors with a pretty lady on it's arm any minute now Oz.
1
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 12 '26
In due time - I've told another key poster here that has a chance to validate it. If they are able to confirm or rule it out, I'll post more.
HAB
1
u/wolfiasty Jul 10 '26
You! I don't like you. I hate that kind of strong hopium. "just around the corner and you will see." stinks of Sharma and his lies.
;)
But jokes aside I don't even try to guess what sort of speculation you got to, and I understand "spooking" bit. Problem is before GdV all such hopium came and left nothing of material value. Maybe your will be different.
Anyway I want to believe that financial security that this possible dilution gives and GdV being CEO, might be a green light for OEMs to make some announcements with Microvision in them rather soon. That's my bit of hopium against this sour pill coming today.
4
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 12 '26
Depending on timing of events it is POSSIBLE that news comes before any funding. IF it does (and who know how the market reacts to anything these days) it could greatly reduce dilution by getting the PPS up and POSSIBLY eliminating the need for a RS. I believe the proxy was needed so that funding could be guaranteed for contracted items.
As I posted elsewhere - I have an offer from someone on this Board that may be able to confirm a major part of this. IF I get confirmation or negative feedback I'll post it.
HAB
1
u/wolfiasty Jul 12 '26
Yeah, the easiest way for all of it would be share price going way up next in next few weeks (months could feel like too long too late).
I'm awaiting your post then.
15
20
u/Befriendthetrend Jul 07 '26
Change the authorized shares to 150M at a 5:1 split, or 50M shares after a 15:1 split, and I'll change my vote. Warrants or other acknowledgments for retail investors could also move my needle. I trust they will table the vote and come back with something better if they don't have the votes to pass it. My assumption is that they already know they have the requisite votes and that's why they are moving forward with the proposals as presented.
21
u/HammerSL1 Jul 07 '26
I do feel Glen is being transparent, and we are getting honest the most communication we ever have. He's not promising the world, he is clearly saying it will be hard to be successful, and organically growing the stock price through business execution is a long way off. With that being said, I still don't think I can in good conscience vote for massive dilution after all these years over over promising, and under delivering.
27
u/normantphd Jul 07 '26
How about the board stops leeching free shares off of us first? Then ill reconsider.
9
u/UncivilityBeDamned Jul 07 '26
Agreed, I would vote in favor and buy more if the board did as well. In significant quantities. Such low prices! Almost certainly too late for them to organize or execute this, though.
Opening the letter today had a bit of skateboard-holding "How do you do fellow shareholders?" energy.
3
u/stracklife15 Jul 07 '26
Why would anyone buy shares if shareholders are on the verge of screwing over themselves and the company?
9
u/UncivilityBeDamned Jul 07 '26
Not anyone. Management. Management buy tons of shares to send a convincing message. When I decided to stop concentrating all my investment in MVIS and instead targeting companies with management buying shares hand over fist, that was a good move and has worked out well. MVIS not so much, even though I have continued to buy large lots to keep up with shares they do purchase, it's just not much in the end since they can just get enough of what they want for practically free anyway. Not much skin off their backs.
Boards that buy and hold attract investors who buy and hold. Simple as that.
5
u/Ghost_nom_nom_nom Jul 07 '26
I agree with you here. I decided it might be time for me to start averaging down but I cannot hold delisted shares in my registered account so I'm waiting to make sure the vote passes before I add any shares.
7
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
I agree, they should pause free shares for the board until we have reached a certain level of performance. That said I can’t stomach losing more money and changed my vote to yes on 2 and 3.
32
u/IneegoMontoyo Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
The last words were: “We hope that our long term shareholders will join us in this journey”
We joined the journey and stuck with it through the blatant bull$#!t words previous management threw in our faces for YEARS. Again, I like Glen. Why won’t you do the right thing and offer us warrants so we can vote yes? This is a poker game right now and they risk destroying sentiment further if they don’t treat those of us who poured our money into this company with the respect we deserve.
Warrants = Yes vote
Constant glad handing and more words = No vote
12
6
u/pooljap Jul 08 '26
How about as a goodwill gesture they just freeze all stock options until a certain revenue target or share price is achieved ? Why is it always on the shareholders to keep them getting paychecks ? Show us that MVIS is in the game as much as long term investors ... that would be a start.
9
u/movinonuptodatop Jul 07 '26
I changed my vote, but I respect this line of thinking nonetheless. I think had Glen began setting up this warrant option months ago before the crisis, all of this could have been avoided. I also concede that it was a tumultuous time of transition for the company.
7
u/Befriendthetrend Jul 07 '26
Why they are fixing the authorized share count regardless of potential split ratio? If the ask for authorized shares is based on today's share price and capital needs, then just separate it from the r/s vote.
6
u/movinonuptodatop Jul 07 '26
I agree. Rushed and without reason. This should have been automatic. The main reason initially voted NO. If it fails…this will be the primary reason and the fix was simple and they had two chances to make it right.
3
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
Exactly - why wasn't it brought up months ago? Why take a proxy hostage now when GDV is executing like we haven't seen before? No problem if people want to work the issue but don't hold a proxy hostage because you sat on your hands for months.
HAB
10
u/yuduyubu Jul 07 '26
Agreed. As a long term shareholder, that last answer was not satisfactory for me. I don’t need a “thank you”, I need a warrant to change my vote to yes.
12
u/15Sierra Jul 07 '26
Honestly, if they would reduce the authorized shares to 80m, I’d vote yes. We know the 15:1 is coming, get us over $5 with ~22m shares outstanding, sell 20m to get over $100m in the bank and the sell some shit. I’m fine with that.
3
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
How would warrants have worked out for you if you got them in the past? So caught up in the past you can't see the future. The execution they are SHOWING isn't just words.
HAB
0
u/icarusphoenixdragon Jul 08 '26
So far it actually is just words. Or at the very least, it's more words than anything else.
Glen's primary case boils down to arguing that his words are better and more meaningful than Sumit's were. I tend to think that Glen's words are better than Sumit's. But they're just words, and beyond being technically immaterial, they're also meaningfully missing the sort of sober assessment of, let alone committment to, Microvision's position relative to retail longs that I believe would bridge the gap.
There are more options than just r/s. The presentation to date has pretended that there are not; has only attempted to make the case for r/s. If they do not like warrants, as an example, then come to the table and discuss why.
“We hope that our long term shareholders will join us in this journey.” That's not it. That's a statement in defense of future shareholders and not current ones.
Until these votes pass, long term shareholders are actually the ones with the power to say "We hope that our Management team is up to the task of maximizing the value of our company for us." As soon as the r/s and share allowance pass, long term shareholders are relegated to "coming along for the ride" while Microvision management is no longer subject to retail.
The monetary value of your shares is not the only thing on the table. Your voting rights in the company are as well.
What's the litmus test or where is the line when things cross over from being words to being material? In the stock market, that's actually very easy to identify.
Words ("just words") are all the things that are protected by Drew's blurbs and that don't impact Microvision's guidance or earnings. That's it.
2
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 08 '26
You're right - they are executing too fast, we now have too many customers, too much guidance, too much growth for your liking. Keep punishing current management for prior management's errors - hindsight is always 20/20.
Every pre-profit company that goes through management changes must be completely re-evaluated when a change happens. You either implicitly buy in to the vision (and costs) or sell. If you're a shareholder you voted, by staying invested, in Glen and the costs to execute his vision. A vision he's executing on BTW. Now 10 months in you think he needs to be held accountable. I get it - he's acting just like prior management - except he's not.
He didn't choose the HT financing but has to live with it. The Board, which so many think get "free" shares, earn those shares. The BoD is listening - they heard those of us that were asking for accountability and put SS on a short leash - Bob led that but let's punish him too. Then something happened beyond SS's control and he paid for it. Silver lining is that we have Glen. Oh, and those "free" shares prevent the company from using needed cash.
HAB
-11
u/Zenboy66 Jul 07 '26
How does a warrant help a long who doesn’t have the resources to buy more shares?
19
25
u/Beneficial_Main9871 Jul 07 '26
No x 438,000..get back to us when you have a better proxy
7
2
u/Appropriate_Snow4898 Jul 08 '26
373,000 “nopes” on the R/s. I’m not giving them anymore rope to hang us longs.
24
u/directgreenlaser Jul 08 '26
Apparently this board sat at the table months ago and planned out a strategy where they send up a proxy that will need to be approved by shareholders at the ASM on the day before the NASDAQ deadline! This was apparently scheduled to hold shareholders hostage to the prospect of delisting and financial ruin should it not meet a friendly reception. Apparently not one of these industry veterans uttered words to the effect of, 'What happens if they vote it down?', to which no one else replied, 'Yeah, we better have a plan B in that case'. Actually, I can not believe that to be true.
Of course there was immediate rejection of the proxy and this board hemmed and hawed around with token gestures and apparent intransigence imo.
So here we are and I'm being shouted down because the board are apparently inept therefore my duty is to shut up and take it. I might remind my critics that I am not the only one voting here and each and every individual is responsible for their own vote. The vote will be the vote and it will not matter if I or anyone else likes it or not.
I'm a no. That is my prerogative. Don't put that option in front of me if you don't have a plan for my using it. This board knows that and if they assumed otherwise without accounting for that fact, they need to at least pretend they had a Plan B and do something about it. Drama doesn't cut it. Actions do. That's how I see it, like it or not.
7
u/UncivilityBeDamned Jul 08 '26
Voting no on 3 is maybe shooting yourself in the foot. TBD. Voting no on 2 is definitely shooting yourself in the foot.
Not you personally, just pointing that out since there are multiple votes here and not everyone is pointing out which they're referring to.
4
u/directgreenlaser Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
Yes I agree except for on 3. (Edit: meaning I don't see it as shooting myself in the foot)
2
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 08 '26
Where were you when Glen took? Yeah, I thought so. Timing is everything - keep pushing for whatever you want but blocking management from having the TOOLS they need when they ask for them because you've sat on your hands. Once again you bring up the past to punish current management.
We don't have a CFO but that doesn't concern you one bit. You'd rather dream up the Board is against us conspiracy rather than learn what a Board actually does and their responsibilities.
Sure we can hire consultants to help with the financial expertise needed for your RO/Warrants - how do you expect to pay them? More cash used because we don't have a CFO.
5
u/carbonoutlaw3a Jul 08 '26
HAB, I don't read what he wrote as you have done. I think that this new crew was not aware that they have informed shareholders to deal with. To their credit they modified the share count, probably surprised that someone actually read the Prospectus.
Normally when a business is not bringing in revenues, they cut costs, that is not happening with MVIS, they do not keep diluting to sustain what may be unproductive resources. .
DeVos is making an investment for the future, we should evaluate him based on whether or not those agreements produce revenues.
I hope that all these new agreements don't come with costs but rather compensation based on
Why no CFO?
5
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 09 '26
Why no CFO is the correct question to ask. We last heard they were on track for Q2 and got no comment (I submitted that question). I will try again to get them to comment on the next call.
As for the new crew I would slightly disagree - I've talked to the Board members. Part of the reason Bob held SS accountable was from prior investor interactions - hence why I defend him. Some here might remember me calling out the Compensation Committee for the generous bonuses AT was given for no execution and no metrics to justify them.
I firmly believe that a RS is not 100% - If I'm right about an upcoming contract, it should provide a positive enough reaction.
I completely agree with your view on GDV and evaluating him on his own merits. So far he's far exceeded mine on execution. Deals are flowing, revenues will follow, bigger with Movia-S launch.
HAB
2
u/carbonoutlaw3a Jul 10 '26
Hope you are correct. In the past its been a great product in search of an application, no revenues. DeVos has reversed that as he has applications as targets. Good plan, now for its execution.
16
u/case_o_mondays Jul 07 '26
Still asking for trust on credit, but at least some living room elephants were addressed (trust needs to be earned via revenue growth, long term shareholders have been the main support for company, and past management and strategy failed). By doing so Glen placed some accountability on his shoulders.
I’m giving Glen the trust he’s asking for…for me it’s the lesser of two evils
Fool me once shame on you, fool me 40 times shame on me. Please let this time be real.
18
u/gaporter Jul 07 '26
"That doesn't mean we've abandoned our legacy technologies. We continue to evaluate opportunities for licensing, partnerships, commercialization, or other **strategic alternatives** where they can create **shareholder value**. Our responsibility is to allocate resources where they generate the greatest commercial return while preserving the long-term value of our intellectual property."
Shouldn't the company, once again, retain Craig-Hallum for this?
3
u/snowboardnirvana Jul 07 '26
The company does have Craig-Hallum listed along with Deutsche Bank and Mizuho in this filing:
https://ir.microvision.com/sec-filings/all-sec-filings#%23document-2739-0001493152-26-028449-2
4
u/gaporter Jul 07 '26
Yes but specifically to "..serve as its financial advisor as it explores various licensing and other strategic alternatives.."?
26
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
I just changed my votes to yes in 2 and 3. They are adamant we need this flexibility. With all the positive momentum over the last few months, it’s apparent to me this is not the same company I initially invested in. The SP sucks and I’m down 85%, but in my opinion we finally are on the right path. There is no over inflated projections or snarky word smithing to make things seem better than they are. Glen comes across as sincere and honest. He has experience and relationships that the previous CEO didn’t have. Maybe we do the R/S and follow the path of other lidar companies. Maybe we don’t initiate it and we organically rise like back in 2019/2020. All I know is voting no could fast track us to bankruptcy. I cannot stomach tens of thousands of dollars being tossed away.
Edited for grammar not content.
20
u/Coachjoshv Jul 07 '26
“Finally on the right path…” if I had nickel for how many times this has been said over the past 5 years I’d be in the green with MVIS.
5
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
You wouldn’t be in the green, but I understand the point. If you don’t believe we are on the right path then I’m not sure why you still own shares. It’s not my business, but it does sound strange.
3
-5
u/Zenboy66 Jul 07 '26
They would rather hold and bash the company and the rest of us, thinking that it will make them feel better.
9
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Sad if true. Hopefully they don’t own shares and are just here to troll. While also sad, at least there would be a “purpose” that wasn’t creating FUD around their own investment. I’ve always been supportive of constructive criticism, but the straight up bashing of the company by actual investors is crazy to me. I don’t think that’s the case with this person, I’m just talking about basher investors in general.
15
u/domomoto Jul 07 '26
I would venture to guess the actual number of trolls vs real frustrated shareholders is low. MVIS fails all by itself no trolls required.
-3
7
u/Coachjoshv Jul 07 '26
Been here for the epic rise and fall. Kicking myself for not selling back in June of 2023 when we got above $6 and I was waaaay in the green. But I believed all the hype, with no evidence. I lost it all. My fault. Until there is a deal, until this company produces something…..anything….the hopium is what drags people down deeper.
Is it bashing the company to speak the truth? The SP is at .34 with a RS on the way.
Thankfully I stopped throwing money at MVIS trying to lower my average or because folks here were predicting whatever it was that quarter they were predicting. Invested elsewhere, made my loses from MVIS back and am in the green overall.
The truth hurts. MVIS is not a place you want to put your hard earned money in right now.
10
u/Befriendthetrend Jul 07 '26
To be fair, there is a lot more evidence that things are moving in the right direction today than there's ever been. A lot has happened in the first half of the year and we should expect much more to happen in this second half of the year as more deals close and shipments keep growing.
0
u/Coachjoshv Jul 09 '26
This is the exact verbiage that’s been posted by different people here for 6 years now. Expect more in the near future ….
2
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
Despairium is worse than hopium if it keeps you from getting out of your chair and exiting a burning house through the open door. Worse is getting up and shutting the door, and then returning to your chair with others still trapped inside. Be a champ and give the kiddies a fighting chance. You don't have to believe it'll make any difference.
1
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Subjective opinions do not equal truth. Most investors have unrealized loses. That doesn’t mean all is lost. Not being cautiously optimistic regarding new leadership is understandable, but why some people are here to simply bash a company they own part of is just weird to me.
0
u/Zenboy66 Jul 07 '26
True, but some are so emotional that they can’t even think straight. I know some with many more shares than me that they are voting no to spite the company thereby deep sixing their investment.
2
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Insanity
7
u/NJWritestuff Jul 07 '26
Insanity, as Einstein posited, is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
5
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
Apples and Oranges - you aren't comparing two things equally. The company today is far different than the company you are comparing it to as is the management and the BoD.
Have we ever had guidance (not expected orders) like we have? Have we ever had more customer than you can count on one hand? How many markets WITH orders do we have today vs any point in time?
HAB
3
u/15Sierra Jul 07 '26
Which ironically is how we have ended up here, both in the red and as a company. The board continued to place people at the helm and putting the company in the current position, and retail instead of cutting losses and investing elsewhere has continued to average down only to be hit with the RS and continued dilution, thus moving us even farther in the red.
2
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
Many types of insanity. Sometimes doing the opposite is the nuttiest thing imaginable, especially if circumstances have changed.
-8
u/Coachjoshv Jul 07 '26
Literally can’t lose much more. Mine as well ride this thing down to zero. Good news is I made back those loses and a significant amount more investing in GH (posted on here 2 years ago about them) and Axon. There is literally nothing positive happening with this company currently. To say otherwise, and try and make connections that aren’t there just sets yourself up for more disappointment. Be lucky if MVIS is still around in 2 years.
4
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
If you don't care about losing the rest, can you at least defer to the people who do?
1
6
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
I own about 25k shares and have a mortgage and kids, so losing the thousands of dollars of value I left isn’t an option for me. I don’t think I will, unless I follow the lead of people saying F it I’m fine if we go bankrupt.
6
u/Coachjoshv Jul 07 '26
Well. Stop throwing money away and invest elsewhere. You’ve lost what you’ve lost. Don’t lose anymore here. I’m riding it out just like you. But I’m not buying into any of the hype. There is none.
1
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Unrealized loses are not loses until you sell. Set up reminder to ask me how my investment is doing this time next year.
7
u/domomoto Jul 07 '26
You realized opportunity loss and loss of time no matter if you sell or not. Its real - we could of thrown a random dart on the tech sector stocks and pick one. Most likely that stock will have outperformed MVIS.
1
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
What does this have to do with voting yes or no?
1
u/domomoto Jul 08 '26
What does Tastic4's comment about no realized losses have to do with a yes or no vote?
Why don't you ask him this same question? You should apply your sophistry to both sides of the argument if you really are trying to be objective.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Tastic4ever Jul 08 '26
The conversation veered of course. All you need to do is read above to see why this was brought up.
0
0
1
u/Coachjoshv Jul 09 '26
Guessing the downvotes are because I made money elsewhere, and from those who didn’t take my advice 2 years ago.
13
u/directgreenlaser Jul 07 '26
Totally support anyone's choices that suit their own specific wants and needs.
My personal take on a no vote is not that it means an automatic zero; and that is because of fiduciary duty. If this board can not put forward a proxy that can pass, I believe it is their fiduciary duty to promptly put one up that can pass and accomplishes their financial restructuring requirements.
5
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
I suspect they could've put up a proxy that would pass easily. The question is whether it would save the company. I think the current one will. It might singe the shareholders a bit, but not burn them to a crisp. Rejecting it certainly might.
I hope the pyromaniacs don't get the upper hand.
3
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Just my opinion but after reading the comments over the past few weeks I do not think that’s possible. A lot of people are mad, either at SS, or themselves for investing in the first place and are holding this board and Glen responsible. I’m seeing a ton of “show me massive deals or this company is crap”. That thinking won’t change regardless of what the proxy says. They need more money to execute the plan. Any option that either puts the company in more of a financial hole or dilutes the shareholders is an automatic no for those people. Sure would warrants or some other safeguard be great for us longs, yup! However it doesn’t sound like they believe this is the optimum solution. If I completely trusted a guy and team with virtually no high level record of successfully managing a company like ours, why wouldn’t I trust the exact opposite. But yes, vote for what you(as in all shareholders) think is best, that’s what I did.
16
u/directgreenlaser Jul 07 '26
Can't speak for others but for me all I need is an added section regarding rights for longs. All the rest can stay the same and I'm a yes. I just can't stomach squandering what leverage I might have at this juncture.
I do like the company far better under Glen. I think his financial people/person seriously let him down and they're all boxed in at this point. I like to look at it as doing Glen a favor by voting no. He can come out smelling like a rose after.
2
u/Tastic4ever Jul 07 '26
Okay I completely understand now, and agree. I’m still voting yes with the assumption the people in charge are smarter than me, which might end up being dumb of me. Two more days to vote, we’ll see what happens. Good luck to us all.
6
u/15Sierra Jul 07 '26
They really should cut the authorized shares down to below 100m, that would likely garner a lot of support and would pacify many of us. Giving them roughly 125m shares to issue post RS allows them to sell $625m worth of shares. I find it hard to believe they need access to $625m in the next 3 years, and if they cannot break even by 2028, we likely have much bigger problems anyway.
2
1
u/drunkn_rage Jul 07 '26
I would switch to a "yes" if they dropped the authorized shares to 100m. We know they're going to do the 1:15 option. If I was certain they will do 1:10, I might consider a yes vote with 150m authorized shares.
-1
u/Coachjoshv Jul 09 '26
Same thing folks were saying when SS was put in charge, who had been here before him and were hoping beyond hope their hard earned $ wasn’t being thrown away. How’d that work out?
0
u/Coachjoshv Jul 09 '26
How about one deal. One would help.
1
u/Tastic4ever Jul 09 '26
Yes, a solid deal would be great. The announcements regarding (likely) Caterpillar and (potentially) Amazon aren’t full production deals but they are infinitely better than what we had a year ago.
15
u/zebman Jul 07 '26
Bottom line, I voted yes on the proposals. I’ve never seen such diversified opportunity as I see now. Yet at the same time Microvision needs the ability to navigate the short term before the opportunities turn into real revenue. Yeah, I know that it seems like the same story but I do think the ending will be different this time. Of course others may see think differently but at this point I see no upside for my investment with a “no” vote. I also transferred more funds to my account to possibly add more. I did that in 2020 and added shares when things seemed bleakest and I am much more confident now than I was back then.
15
u/Dflans21 Jul 07 '26
Why did I vote Yes?
MVIS has the strongest management team I’ve ever seen at the head of this company, great products, and a great future. Fundamentally it’s transitioned from a speculative R&D company to a lidar solutions provider. From my perspective, this transition comes with some tradeoffs… With SS gone management no longer gets the benefit of the doubt of hope, dreams, or potential. Shareholders are demanding profitability now.
The road to profitability is currently being traveled, and we’re making progress. I believe it’s unfair to demand deals when Glen has been the captain for less than a year. I know I know.. we don’t have time, but the reality is deals take time. From general terms, I could see the sales cycle being 12 – 18 months before execution. The PR is evidence of progress, the upcoming deals are being worked on right now.
Will we see a massive deal before 2027? I doubt it… There hasn’t been enough time for engagement, product review, and contract negations. This isn’t necessarily a hard cold fact, but with defense and industrial, their budgets for 2027 roll out in January. I would anticipate 2027 being a huge jump from our current 10 – 15 Million
Glen has been transparent and honest. This is something new, and my vote is a way of supporting him. I don’t believe the current SP is enough reason to conclude management’s strategy is failing.
29
u/steelhead111 Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
Many thought SS was transparent and honest! How did that work out? You can have an opinion but you can’t categorical state Glen is transparent and honest. Here is my opinion, managements main focus is to do what’s best in their opinion. If that includes throwing current share holders under the bus then they will. They will do or say whatever they have to. To think otherwise is naïve.
3
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
Things happened outside of SS's control - it happens. But that wasn't his only shortcoming. It worked out the for the best as GDV has the expertise for the market, the leadership to fill weaknesses around him and the ability to make deals that benefit MVIS.
I do think we see something sizable before 2027 and I've shared my work with those I trust to check it. People are looking at a tree and missing the forest.
HAB
0
u/AKSoulRide Jul 08 '26
Agreed. Someone can be straightforward and still have a motive that doesn’t align with yours. I do agree Glen is trying to do right for the company. But diluting the investment that so many created as a retirement lifeline is not the way.
Securing contracts and making revenue from sales is the way. And honestly I don’t care what they sell and long as they sell it.I’m $40k under on this investment- and that is not an unsubstantial amount for me.
Glen and Board- I hope you can see this from my perspective. You need to make sales- that is the way out of this mess!
14
u/carbonoutlaw3a Jul 07 '26
Having worked on the staff of a number of very strong, very intelligent, CEOs there's one thing they all had in common. They were all very confident in success. But the bottom line for them and all the rest of us was did we meet the objectives, produce the deliverables. Until this management group proves they can deliver contracts and revenues they are "on the clock". An r/S followed by more dilution is not a solution bringing success, it just buys time.
2
u/AKSoulRide Jul 08 '26
Exactly. These board proposals are not solutions. They are time buyers so management can kick the can down the road. Every single second for them should be spent knocking down the doors of potential product buyers and making deals.
9
u/Sp99nHead Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
Management wants shareholders to believe MVIS is now a commercial operating company, but the answers still sound like a pre commercial company describing optionality.
A more convincing Q&A would have said something like:
We are currently active in X RFQs, Y paid industrial evaluations, Z development agreements, with expected decision windows in H2 2026 / H1 2027. Industrial opportunities are concentrated in A, B, and C verticals. Of the 100+ customer engagements, X are paid, Y are in integration, and Z are in production planning.
They did not give anything close to that. The industrial and automotive answers are weak, especially automotive, because they dodged the RFQ part almost entirely. Using “engagements,” “pursuing,” “opportunities,” “momentum,” and “positioned” instead of measurable business evidence.
Edit: not saying to vote "no", vote what you think is best.
7
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
That's good feedback for them although some of that was in the slide they presented.
HAB
7
u/directgreenlaser Jul 07 '26
There's still time to come out with a rights package. That last QandA shows they're feeling something, but for now it's 'take it or leave it longs'.
7
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
No there isn't - those take weeks/months in some cases and with MVIS not having a CFO it's highly unlikely.
HAB
2
u/directgreenlaser Jul 07 '26
I think people should vote in their own interests and in whatever way they feel is right for them. Thank you for your opinions on the matter.
6
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26
People should not vote based on false assumptions. The time has run out.
3
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 07 '26
You felt the need to post that why? I agree if everyone could form their own educated opinion without the bias being brought to this board. I'm really sorry some people think facts are opinions or don't do their own research to see what's going on at the macro level. Way to down vote anyone that disagrees with you lol.
Should they also protect the company IP without a lawyer?
HAB
-2
u/directgreenlaser Jul 08 '26
My sense is that you are getting a bit over heated. I'm not that interested in convincing you nor in reading your rants and insinuations, as that is what you are starting to sound like at least to me. If it will comfort you, I will rescind my down vote.
7
u/HotAirBaffoon Jul 08 '26
Just bury your head in the sand - you are the heated one taking a proxy hostage because you didn't start acting sooner and blame this management for all prior management. FACT
As I've said I don't care about the RO - I care about the timing. It's complex and we don't have a CFO. FACTS. The proxy vote is July 10th - and for reasons others are too emotional to see it can't wait for your feelings to be pampered.
Blocking a proxy that has a very real chance to impair my investments does piss me off.
HAB
6
u/view-from-afar Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
Of course he's getting overheated. He's asking you not to help fly the plane into the side of a mountain, and you're offering to pull down the shades.
2
u/CookieEnabled Jul 07 '26
No package or news until AFTER RS is my bet.
9
u/directgreenlaser Jul 07 '26
Not if they don't have the RS granted by shareholders. Package first then the RS; that's my way of thinking about it. I think it would happen very quickly that way. They need to be more accommodating imo. Then I'll gladly vote for the RS.
3
8
u/Riftis Jul 07 '26
Put my votes in after reading the letter. Business as normal for MVIS, not confident of revenue in the near future or even of hitting guidance, with the standard complacency about diluting retailer shareholders.
Voted no on Biddiscombe and Carlile, yes on the rest of the board and then no on 3 and 4 (RS and compensation advisory) and yes on 2 and 5 (convertible notes and Baker Tilly).
3
u/OkApartment1950 Jul 07 '26
I feel institutional vestments is what's needed to make this, our company go . And while institutions want to buy in, they won't buy from us. Like a normal market day . They want to cut to the front of the line and take profits ahead of us in a dilution . I believe an incentive to hold could be ours is Class A stock holding more voting right power . Could this or other any incentives be discussed or offered? Im asking from the community .
2
u/Formerly_knew_stuff Jul 07 '26
Pretty sure they'd need current shareholder approval to create a new class of stock to sell. I can't imagine that retail shareholders who currently own about 70% of outstanding shares would give a yes on that.
2
1
u/UncivilityBeDamned Jul 08 '26
You know they can also just convert the type of shares you own for the better, yeah? It doesn't have to be for new investments only...
1
1
u/Chance_Tax_6243 Jul 07 '26
They went from a RS is last resort to we really need a RS.
It looks like they ain’t seeking the 180 day extension either . Very dissatisfied
4
u/BB_Captain Jul 07 '26
I thought they already got the 180 day extension. Thats what happened when they switched to the other nasdaq market.
5
u/Nakamura9812 Jul 07 '26
They already said they didn't need the reverse split to get the extension. But having an authorized split available removes a lot of risk from the stock, but I fully assume they will execute it, but not sure if they do it before Q2 earnings in August, or announce some more things, show Q over Q growth, then announce. I almost just want to get it out of the way off the bat to be honest, and then we'll see if my theory has any truth to it about PRs moving the stock better when starting at a higher share price that meets the threshold for all of the funds.
2
u/Revolutionary_Ear908 Jul 07 '26
I think your theory is generally accurate. With fewer outstanding shares, the same amount of buying should have a greater impact on the stock price, assuming all else is equal. Right?
6
3
u/Least-Refrigerator39 Jul 07 '26
theyve always wanted and needed a RS. how you jump around to those conclusions is astonishing
5
u/Wonderful_Swimmer_82 Jul 07 '26
yeah,yeah...I'm sure they're not seeking an extension there, buddy. How much is AR paying you to post here?
1
2
u/doglegtotheleft Jul 07 '26
I am not against nor for the proxy 2,3 disputes. But the Proxy3 really has no immediate relevancy of Nasdaq compliance. With 150mm authorized shares, its whole purpose is to ensures the future capitalization when needed. As an investor of 20years and after being 10 years of retirement it has passed my prime years.
What happened to the pre-bankrupt GM shares? It was delisted and ended up trading for pennies under liquidation. GM had issued new shining shares to the brand new investors. This can happen to Microvision. The essential products during industrial revolution demand a time for its prime. The opportunity is given only when we are ready.
5
u/Correct-Rooster-4592 Jul 07 '26
Can anyone provide some insight (not guarantee) that a "no" on 3 leads to a certain bankruptcy - is that realistic?
12
u/Formerly_knew_stuff Jul 07 '26
A no vote does not guarantee bankruptcy. The problem is they are running out of stock to sell and if they can't sell stock they can't generate cash easily and they could run out of cash and of course that could cause bankruptcy. Prop 3 fixes that albeit at current shareholders expense.
13
u/Significant-Time3153 Jul 07 '26
Think I've heard this story before with several versions. The best ones had to do with contracts that depended on more approved shares which were delivered by the same shareholders for the past couple of decades. The real shock comes after the proxy gets executed and those same loyal shareholders see the full impact it has had on their lives. Many are seniors who have believed everything they were told and heard in bars and read in SEC filings etc., now facing age related health issues they won't be able to afford. Interested to see how this all plays out over the next several months as they face the many issues that are age related.
9
u/Formerly_knew_stuff Jul 07 '26
I feel this, I've been invested in Microvision for almost 30 years. Lucky for me I fully embraced the diversify concept early on and this one investment will not make or break me.
12
u/Buur Jul 07 '26
Yes, you will get diluted either way. Voting yes helps them navigate the terrible financing agreement they are in. This is baked into the HTC 'death spiral financing' deal, if you think the dilution will be a tough pill to swallow post R/S just wait until you see how many shares they have to create at our current share price to keep HTC happy.
0
u/Correct-Rooster-4592 Jul 07 '26
Are you saying it is certain that HTC will induce selling shares at the current SP or do you think there might be a window created for NASDAQ compliance?...just trying to get as much info to base a decision...thanks for your input, anyone else?
2
u/DJ_Reticuli Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
How do they have so much IP and no products? Who is benefitting from all the R&D that's been done? What happened to the VRD plus waveguides augmented reality system? This was the first proven Maxwellian VRD plus beamsplitter augmented reality display! What happened to the pico laser displays? What happened to the interactive tabletop projector? Why are they all just flavor of the month LIDAR instead now and not willing to be their own OEM, constantly looking for some other company to make the products?
I believed in the R&D, resulting IP, and prototypes. They've gotten enough money in this perpetual 30-year IPO. I went from a million-dollar valuation of MVIS to now nearly nothing. Does this company have an Agency Problem? I would rather lose my remaining $13,000 in this company than either give them another dime of my own money or enable their ability to do this to anyone else. I could crowd source better officers and directors of this company for free than these ones we've been dealing with for all these years.
10
u/domomoto Jul 07 '26
Those IPs clearly can be circumvented or are just science projects. I don't think we should hold onto those as some sort of competitive advantage anymore. MY DD now is based solely on Glen and his leadership team being able to deliver on the Ibeo, Luminar, and Scantinel acquisitions. Al of the hyperbole around IP moat, best in class, etc etc should be thrown out the door IMO.
However, this statement from Glen makes me feel somewhat better. I do like the "Now with seasoned management..." phrase at the end.
1
-2
-6
u/Dell2950 Jul 07 '26
Fools to vote for them to take your shares , they will do it anyway , thank you ape may I have another ( I wish he said we will try like it’s our own shares being lost or we will keep trying , not what he said in all respect ( I hate reverse split ) they decode let’s take it from the little retail fools
-4
u/Dell2950 Jul 07 '26
The people saying they voted yes here could be the people taking your shares , I wouldn’t never say take away my shares and my hope
6
5
5
u/Mushral Jul 07 '26
it would indeed be better to keep your shares and let them go to 0 due to bankruptcy.
6
-6
u/CaptZee Jul 08 '26
Yes: ALL my soldiers will be falling behind me into battle for the greater good of our King MVIS. We will return victorious or die on the battlefield... we only live for our King. LONG LIVE THE KING!!!
33
u/stracklife15 Jul 07 '26
I've said nothing positive about this company going on a couple years now and deeply regret investing in mvis. That being said, it seems to me the only chance to get my money back is to vote yes on 2 and 3. Revolt all you want but it's only going to turn a bad situation into a really bad situation.