PART I

Forward-Looking Statements

This annual report on Form 10-K of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. contains “forward-looking statements” that may state our management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about the company and its business. Any statement in this report that is not a statement of historical fact is a forward-looking statement, and in some cases, words such as “believe,” “estimate,” “project,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “anticipate,” “plans,” “seeks,” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the anticipated outcomes or result. These statements are not guarantees of future performance, and undue reliance should not be placed on these statements. It is important to note that Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc.’s actual results could differ materially from what is expressed in our forward-looking statements due to the risk factors described in the section of this report entitled “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this report as well as the following risks and uncertainties:

•                   Our history of losses and uncertainty surrounding our ability to achieve profitability;

Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. undertakes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

number at that address is (949) 206-8000. Previously, our principal executive offices were located in Tampa, Florida. In December 2003, we consolidated all corporate functions into our Lake Forest facility, which had previously served as our principal research and development office. Our Internet website address is www.liquidmetal.com and all of our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission are available free of charge on our website.

Subsidiaries and Other Locations

We currently own and operate a manufacturing facility in Pyongtaek, South Korea, which became operational in the third quarter of 2002. This Korean subsidiary handles our Bulk Liquidmetal alloy business which includes market opportunities to manufacture and sell casing components for electronic devices, medical devices, sporting goods, tooling, prototype sampling, defense applications and metal processing equipment. We also opened a post processing facility in Weihai, China in the third quarter of 2004. This Chinese subsidiary facilitates our bulk alloy manufacturing business by handling most of our post manufacturing processes. Lastly, we operate a distribution warehouse division in Conroe, Texas to handle our Liquidmetal alloy industrial coatings which are used primarily as protective coatings for industrial machinery and equipment, such as drill pipe used by the oil drilling industry and boiler tubes used by coal burning power plants.

Segments

In April 2002, we began classifying operations into two reportable segments: Liquidmetal alloy industrial coatings and bulk Liquidmetal alloys. The Liquidmetal alloy industrial coatings are used primarily as a protective coating for industrial machinery and equipment, such as drill pipe used by the oil drilling industry and boiler tubes used by coal burning power plants. Bulk Liquidmetal alloys include market opportunities to manufacture and sell casing components for electronic devices, medical devices, sporting goods, tooling, prototype sampling, defense applications and metal processing equipment. The expenses incurred by the bulk Liquidmetal alloy segment are manufacturing, research and development costs, and selling expenses associated with identifying and developing market opportunities. Bulk Liquidmetal alloy products can be distinguished from Liquidmetal alloy coatings in that the bulk Liquidmetal alloy can have significant thickness, up to approximately one inch, which allows for their use in a wider variety of applications other than a thin protective coating applied to machinery and equipment. Revenue and expenses associated with research and development services are included in the bulk Liquidmetal alloy segment.

Results of segment operations and assets are included in Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements contained in this Form
10-K.

Our Technology

The performance, processing, and potential cost advantages of Liquidmetal alloys are a function of their unique atomic structure and their proprietary material composition.

Unique Atomic Structure

The atomic structure of Liquidmetal alloys is the fundamental feature that differentiates them from other alloys and metals. In the molten state, the atomic particles of all alloys and metals have an amorphous atomic structure, which means that the atomic particles appear in a completely random structure with no discernible patterns. However, when non-amorphous alloys and metals are cooled to a solid state, their atoms bond together in a repeating pattern of regular and predictable shapes, or crystalline grains. This process is analogous to the way ice forms when water freezes and crystallizes. In non-amorphous metals and alloys, the individual crystalline grains contain naturally occurring structural defects that limit the potential strength and performance characteristics of the material. These defects, known as dislocations, consist of discontinuities or inconsistencies in the patterned atomic structure of each grain. Unlike other alloys and metals, bulk Liquidmetal alloys can retain their amorphous atomic structure throughout the solidification process and therefore do not develop crystalline grains and the associated dislocations. Consequently, bulk Liquidmetal alloys exhibit superior strength and other superior performance characteristics compared to their crystalline counterparts. Our Liquidmetal alloy coatings, in contrast to our bulk alloys, have a crystalline atomic structure when initially applied, but their atomic structure becomes amorphous as the coatings rub against surfaces under force, thus improving their performance over time.

Prior to 1993, commercially viable amorphous alloys could be created only in thin forms, such as coatings, films, or ribbons. However, in 1993, researchers at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) developed the first

4

commercially viable amorphous alloy in a bulk form. Today, bulk Liquidmetal alloys can be formed into objects that are up to one inch thick, and we are not aware of any other commercially available amorphous alloys that can achieve this thickness. We have the exclusive right to commercialize bulk amorphous alloy technology through a license agreement with Caltech and other patents that we own.

Proprietary Material Composition

The constituent elements and percentage composition of Liquidmetal alloys are critical to their ability to solidify into an amorphous atomic structure. We have several different alloy compositions that have different constituent elements in varying percentages. These compositions are protected by various patents that we own or exclusively license from third parties, including Caltech. The raw materials that we use in Liquidmetal alloys are readily available and can be purchased from multiple suppliers.

Advantages of Liquidmetal Alloys

Liquidmetal alloys possess a unique combination of performance, processing and cost advantages that we believe makes them superior in many ways to other commercially available materials for a variety of existing and potential future product applications.

Performance Advantages

Our bulk Liquidmetal alloys provide several distinct performance advantages over other materials, and we believe that these advantages make the alloys desirable in applications that require high yield strength, strength-to-weight ratio, elasticity and hardness.

The high yield strength of bulk Liquidmetal alloys means that a high amount of stress must be exerted to create permanent deformation. However, because the yield strength is so high, the yield strength of many of our bulk Liquidmetal alloy compositions is very near their ultimate strength, which is the measure of stress at which total breakage occurs. Therefore, very little additional stress may be required to break an object made of bulk Liquidmetal alloys once the yield strength is exceeded. Although we believe that the yield strength of many of our bulk alloys exceeds the ultimate strength of most other commonly used alloys and metals, our bulk alloys may not be suitable for certain applications, such as pressurized tanks, in which the ability of the material to yield significantly before it breaks is more important than its strength advantage. Additionally, although our bulk alloys show a high resistance to crack initiation because of their very high strength and hardness, certain of our bulk alloys are sensitive to crack propagation under certain long-term, cyclical loading conditions. Crack propagation is the tendency of a crack to grow after it forms. We are currently developing new alloy compositions that have improved material properties to overcome these limitations.

Processing Advantages

The processing of a material generally refers to how a material is shaped, formed, or combined with other materials to create a finished product. Bulk Liquidmetal alloys possess processing characteristics that we believe make them preferable to other materials in a wide variety of applications. In particular, our alloys are amenable to processing options that are similar in many respects to those associated with plastics. For example, we believe that bulk Liquidmetal alloys have superior net-shape casting capabilities as compared to high-strength crystalline metals and alloys. “Net-shape casting” is a type of casting that permits the creation of near-to-net shaped products that reduce costly post-cast processing or machining. Additionally, unlike most metals and alloys, our bulk Liquidmetal alloys are capable of being thermoplastically molded in bulk form. Thermoplastic molding consists of heating a solid piece of material until it is transformed into a moldable state, although at temperatures much lower than the melting temperature, and then introducing it into a mold to form near-to-net shaped products. Accordingly, thermoplastic molding can be beneficial and economical for net shape fabrication of high-strength products.

Bulk Liquidmetal alloys also permit the creation of composite materials that cannot be created with most non-amorphous metals and alloys. A composite is a material that is made from two or more different types of materials. In general, the ability to create composites is beneficial because constituent materials can be combined with one another to optimize the composite’s performance characteristics for different applications. In other metals and alloys, the high temperatures required for processing could damage some of the composite’s constituent materials and therefore limit their utility. However, the relatively low melting temperatures of bulk Liquidmetal alloys allow mild processing conditions that

5

eliminate or limit damage to the constituent materials when creating composites. In addition to composites, we believe that the processing advantages of Liquidmetal alloys will ultimately allow for a variety of other finished forms, including a coating or a spray. Most high-strength metals and alloys cannot be processed into these forms.

Notwithstanding the foregoing advantages, our bulk Liquidmetal alloys possess certain limitations relative to processing. The beneficial processing features of our bulk alloys are made possible in part by the alloys’ relatively low melting temperatures. Although a lower melting temperature is a beneficial characteristic for processing purposes, it renders certain bulk alloy compositions unsuitable for certain high-temperature applications, such as jet engine exhaust components. Additionally, the current one-inch thickness limitation of our zirconium-titanium bulk alloy renders our alloys currently unsuitable for use as structural materials in large-scale applications, such as load-bearing beams in building construction. We are currently engaged in research and development with the goal of developing processing technology and new alloy compositions that will enable our bulk alloys to be formed into thicker objects.

Cost Advantages

Liquidmetal alloys have the potential to provide cost advantages over other high-strength metals and alloys in certain applications. Because bulk Liquidmetal alloy has processing characteristics similar in some respects to plastics, which lends itself to near-to-net shape casting and molding, Liquidmetal alloys can in many cases be shaped efficiently into intricate, engineered products. This capability can eliminate or reduce certain post-casting steps, such as machining and re-forming, and therefore has the potential to significantly reduce processing costs associated with making parts in high volume.

Additionally, because the near-to-net shape processing of Liquidmetal alloys reduces the need for capital-intensive heavy industrial equipment such as that found in foundry and forging operations, Liquidmetal alloys can be processed with a smaller machinery footprint, which allows for more efficient development of facilities and reduced permitting and regulatory costs. We believe that these advantages may allow our customers an opportunity to maintain or improve the performance of their products without a commensurate increase in cost.

Our Strategy

As a result of the experience and knowledge that we have gained through our activities to date, and recognizing that developing and commercializing a revolutionary new technology is an evolutionary process, we are continually modifying our business strategy to enable us to better capitalize on our evolving core strengths and more effectively pursue revenue growth and profitability. The key elements of our strategy include:

•                   Identifying and Developing New Applications for Our Liquidmetal Alloy Technology. We intend to continue to identify and develop new applications that will benefit from the performance, processing, and cost advantages of Liquidmetal alloys.

•                   Focusing Our Marketing and Internal Manufacturing Activities on Select Products with Expected Higher Gross-Margins. We intend to focus our marketing and internal manufacturing activities on select products with anticipated higher gross margins. This strategy is designed to align our product development initiatives with our manufacturing processes and manufacturing cost structure, and to reduce our exposure to more commodity-type product applications that are prone to unpredictable demand and fluctuating pricing. Our focus is primarily on higher-margin products that possess design features that take optimal advantage of our existing and developing manufacturing technology and that command a price commensurate with the performance advantages of our alloys. In addition to our focus on products with higher gross margins, we will continue to engage in prototype manufacturing, both for internally manufactured products and for products that will ultimately be licensed to or manufactured by third parties.

•                   Further Developing Our Manufacturing Processes, Capabilities, and Efficiencies for Bulk Liquidmetal Alloys. We intend to improve and enhance our internal manufacturing processes, capabilities, and efficiencies in order to maintain quality control over products made from bulk Liquidmetal alloys, to focus on improvements to the processing of our alloys, and to protect our intellectual property. As our alloys become more pervasive, however, we expect to enter into additional strategic relationships that would involve the licensing of Liquidmetal technology to third parties for certain market segments.

•                   Pursuing Strategic Partnerships In Order to More Rapidly Develop and Commercialize Products . We intend to

6

actively pursue and support strategic partnerships that will enable us to leverage the resources, strength, and technologies of other companies in order to more rapidly develop and commercialize products. These partnerships may include licensing transactions in which we license full commercial rights to our technology in a specific application area, or they may include transactions of a more limited scope in which, for example, we outsource manufacturing activities or grant distribution rights. We believe that utilizing such a partnering strategy will enable us to reduce our working capital burden, better fund product development efforts, better understand customer adoption practices, leverage the technical and financial resources of our partners, and more effectively handle product design and process challenges. As this partnering strategy evolves, a growing portion of our revenue mix may be comprised of revenue from the provision of product development services, technical support, and engineering services, as well as revenues from royalties on the sale of Liquidmetal alloy products by our partners.

•                   Advancing the Liquidmetal® Brand . We believe that building our corporate brand will foster continued adoption of our technology. Our goal is to position Liquidmetal alloys as a superior substitute for materials currently used in a variety of products across a range of industries. Furthermore, we seek to establish Liquidmetal alloys as an enabling technology that will facilitate the creation of a broad range of commercially viable new products. To enhance industry awareness of our company and increase demand for Liquidmetal alloys, we are reviewing various brand development strategies that could include collaborative advertising and promotional campaigns with select customers, industry conference and trade show appearances, public relations, and other means.

Applications for Liquidmetal Alloys

We have focused our commercialization efforts for Liquidmetal alloys on five identified product areas. We believe that these areas are consistent with our strategy in terms of market size, building brand recognition, and providing an opportunity to develop and refine our processing capabilities. Although we believe that strategic partnering transactions could create valuable opportunities beyond the parameters of these target markets, we anticipate continuing to pursue these markets both internally and in conjunction with partners.

Components for Electronic Products

We produce components for electronic devices using our bulk Liquidmetal alloys and believe that our alloys offer enhanced performance and design benefits for these components in certain applications. Bulk Liquidmetal alloys can be used for various structural components of a cellular phone, including the shield, faceplate, hinge, hinge housings, back plate, side plates, brackets, and the cover on the phones. We initially targeted the electronic casings market because of its potential for high product volumes and branding opportunities; however, unpredictable customer adoption practices, short product model lives, processing limitations, and intense pricing pressures make it very challenging to compete in this high-volume market. Accordingly, we are currently limiting our focus in this market to higher-margin applications that have the potential to benefit from the unique performance characteristics of bulk Liquidmetal alloys. We continue to believe that the high strength-to-weight ratio and elastic limit of bulk Liquidmetal alloys enable the production of stronger and thinner electronic devices as compared to plastic, zinc, and magnesium, and we intend to focus on products that require these design and performance benefits.

Through our shipments to date, we have demonstrated that bulk Liquidmetal alloys can be used for structural components of cellular phones and other electronic devices. During 2004 and 2005, we shipped production quantities of cell phone components to Samsung Electronics Company and Vertu Limited, the luxury communication products subsidiary of Nokia, for inclusion in various cellular phone models.

Sporting Goods and Leisure Products

We are developing a variety of applications for Liquidmetal alloys in the sporting goods and leisure products area.

In the sporting goods industry, we believe that the high strength, hardness, and elasticity of our bulk alloys have the potential to enhance performance in a variety of products, and we further believe that many sporting goods products are conducive to our internal manufacturing strategy of focusing on high-margin products that meet our design criteria. Substantial opportunities also exist for our amorphous alloy coatings, powders and composites. In 2003, Rawlings Sporting Goods Company launched a new line of baseball and softball bats that utilize a Liquidmetal alloy coating, and HEAD NV Sport launched a new line of HEAD® Liquidmetal® tennis racquets that incorporates Liquidmetal alloy in composite form in their racquet design. In 2005, we have also launched goods that utilize Liquidmetal alloy including skis.

7

Other potential applications for our alloys in this industry include golf clubs, eyewear, fishing, hunting, and other sport products.

In the leisure products category, we believe that bulk Liquidmetal alloys can be used to efficiently produce intricately engineered designs with high-quality finishes, such as premium watchcases, and we further believe that Liquidmetal alloy technology can be used to make high-quality, high-strength jewelry from precious metals. We have successfully produced prototype rings made from an amorphous Liquidmetal platinum alloy that is harder (and hence more scratch resistant) than conventional platinum jewelry.

In order to accelerate the commercialization of Liquidmetal alloys in the jewelry and high-end luxury products market, in June 2003 we entered into a strategic licensing transaction with LLPG, Inc., a corporation headed by a former director of our company with ties to the Swiss jewelry and luxury goods market. While we have not generated revenues to date, under this agreement, LLPG was granted a 10-year exclusive worldwide license to manufacture and sell a variety of luxury goods, including watchcases and precious-metal jewelry, utilizing Liquidmetal alloys. Under the agreement, we are entitled to royalties over the life of the contract on all products produced and sold by LLPG.

Medical Devices

We are engaged in product development efforts relating to various medical devices that could be made from Liquidmetal alloys. We believe that the unique properties of bulk Liquidmetal alloys provide a combination of performance and cost benefits that could make them a desirable replacement to incumbent materials, such as stainless steel and titanium, currently used in various medical device applications. Our ongoing emphasis in 2004 and 2005 has been on surgical instrument applications for Liquidmetal alloys. These include, but are not limited to, specialized blades, orthopedic instruments utilized for implant surgery procedures, dental devices, and general surgery devices. The potential value offered by our alloys is high performance in some cases and cost reduction in others, the latter stemming from the ability of Liquidmetal alloys to be net shape cast into components, thus reducing costs of secondary processing. The status of most components in the prototyping phase is subject to non-disclosure agreements with our customers.

We believe that our future success in the medical device market will be driven largely by strategically aligning ourselves with well-established companies that are uniquely positioned to facilitate the introduction of Liquidmetal alloys into this market, especially as it relates to the unique processing challenges and stringent material qualification requirements that are prevalent in this industry. We also believe that our prospects for success in this market will be enhanced through our focus on optimizing existing alloy compositions and developing new alloy compositions to satisfy the industry’s rigorous material qualification standards.

Industrial Coatings and Powders

We continue to market and sell amorphous alloy industrial coatings and powders under the Liquidmetal® ArmacorTM Coatings brand name. Liquidmetal alloy coatings are used primarily as a protective coating for industrial machinery and equipment. Since the inception of this business in the late 1980s, our proprietary coatings have demonstrated a high degree of hardness and low coefficient of friction which, when combined with their strong adhesion properties, reduce the wear and consequent failure of the machinery and equipment on which they are used. In contrast to our bulk alloys, we sell Liquidmetal coatings primarily in the form of a wire or powder feedstock that is melted and applied to machinery or equipment through welding or thermal spray processes.

Our Liquidmetal coatings are widely used in the oil drilling industry as a protective coating on drill pipe and casings, and we estimate that our coatings represent a dominant share of annual worldwide sales of hard band coatings for new oil drill pipe. Drilling often places tremendous stress on pipes and casings, especially whenever the drill changes direction. Both the drill pipe and casing experience excessive wear, which leads to higher replacement costs and greater failure rates. Liquidmetal coatings are used to provide a protective coating, or hard band, around the outside of the drill pipe and the inside of casings to reduce wear and failure rates and accordingly reduce operating costs.

Liquidmetal coatings have also been sold into the power generation industry specifically for the purpose of coating boiler tubes in coal-burning power plants in order to extend the lives of these boilers. Boiler tubes are subject to high heat, erosion, and corrosion and often require costly replacement, both in terms of replacement parts and length of downtime for installation. Additionally, residue build-up in boiler tubes of coal burning power plants creates operating inefficiencies. Historic performance and testing of Liquidmetal coatings have demonstrated that our coatings extend the life of these boiler tubes meaningfully beyond their current average life depending on the specific environment. In addition, our coatings have demonstrated the ability to reduce build-up of residue on boiler tubes, helping to improve the efficiencies of

8

the boilers. Historically, we have not concentrated sales efforts on the boiler tube market in a substantial way. However, given the size of the market and potential opportunities for our coatings, we have recently dedicated greater effort to this area.

Defense Applications

We are working with the U.S. Department of Defense, as well as a variety of defense-related research and development agencies and large defense contractors, to develop various defense-related applications for Liquidmetal alloys. For example, we are currently developing prototype kinetic energy penetrator rods for use in armor-piercing ammunition systems. Kinetic energy penetrators, or KEPs, are armor piercing munitions that are currently made primarily from depleted uranium or tungsten alloys. Initial ballistic tests under the Liquidmetal KEP program have demonstrated that tungsten KEPs perform better whenever Liquidmetal alloy is combined with the tungsten to create a composite material. In August 2003, we signed a new $3.0 million research and development contract with the U.S. Army for the development of KEPs. Our strategy is to orient the KEP program toward future systems such as the Joint Strike Fighter program and the Army’s Future Combat System.

We also continue to work with a number of defense-related research and development agencies and large defense companies to identify additional military applications that may benefit from using Liquidmetal alloys. We believe that our alloys are well-positioned to capitalize on the trend toward lighter but stronger weapon systems in the U.S. military, and our strategy is to align ourselves with the largest and most significant players in this industry. Product development programs for defense applications are currently underway with several leading defense contractors, including Alliant Techsystems and General Dynamics.

Going Concern

We have experienced significant operating losses since our inception. Our net loss for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 was $11.2 million and $12.7 million, respectively. In our audit reports on our financial statements for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, our present and former auditors have included a going-concern qualification indicating that our significant operating losses and working capital deficit cause substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. By issuing an opinion stating that there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, our former and current auditors have indicated that they are uncertain as to whether we have the capability to continue our operations without additional funding.

Accordingly, we anticipate that we will need additional funding during the next 12 months and would seek to raise such funds through public or private equity financing, bank debt financing, or from other sources. Adequate funds may not be available when needed, and if we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, existing stockholders may be diluted.

9

Liquidmetal Golf

From 1997 until September 2001, we engaged in the retail marketing and sale of golf clubs through a majority owned subsidiary, Liquidmetal Golf. The retail business of Liquidmetal Golf was discontinued in September 2001 and is now treated as a discontinued operation in our consolidated financial statements. Although the retail golf club business has been discontinued, Liquidmetal Golf will be engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling golf club components to golf original equipment manufacturers that will integrate these components into their own clubs and then sell them under their respective brand names. Liquidmetal Technologies owns 79% of the outstanding common stock in Liquidmetal Golf.

Our Liquidmetal Golf subsidiary has the exclusive right and license to utilize our Liquidmetal alloy technology for purposes of golf equipment applications. This right and license is set forth in an intercompany license agreement between Liquidmetal Technologies and Liquidmetal Golf. This license agreement provides that Liquidmetal Golf has a perpetual and exclusive license to use Liquidmetal alloy technology for the purpose of manufacturing, marketing, and selling golf club components and other products used in the sport of golf. In consideration of this license, Liquidmetal Golf has issued 4,500,000 shares of Liquidmetal Golf common stock to Liquidmetal Technologies.

Our Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property consists of patents, trade secrets, know-how, and trademarks. Protection of our intellectual property is a strategic priority for our business, and we intend to vigorously protect our patents and other intellectual property. Our intellectual property portfolio includes 27 owned or licensed U.S. patents and numerous patent applications relating to the composition, processing, and application of our alloys, as well as various foreign counterpart patents and patent applications.

Our initial bulk amorphous alloy technology was developed by researchers at the California Institute of Technology (“Caltech”). We have purchased patent rights that provide us with the exclusive right to commercialize the amorphous alloy and other amorphous alloy technology acquired from Caltech through a license agreement (“Caltech License Agreement”) with Caltech. Under the Caltech license agreement, we have the exclusive worldwide right to make, use, and sell products from all of Caltech’s inventions, proprietary information, know-how, and other technology relating to amorphous alloys existing as of September 1, 2001. We also have an exclusive worldwide license to eleven issued patents and two patent applications held by Caltech relating to amorphous alloy technology, as well as all related foreign counterpart patents and patent applications. Of the patents currently issued to Caltech and licensed by us, the earliest expiration date is 2013 and the latest expiration date is 2021. Furthermore, the license agreement gives us the exclusive right to make, use, and sell products from substantially all amorphous alloy technology that is developed in Professor William Johnson’s Caltech laboratory during the period September 1, 2001 through August 31, 2005. All fees and other amounts payable by us for these rights and licenses have been paid in full, and no further royalties, license fees, or other amounts will be payable in the future under this license agreement.

Our rights under the license agreement are perpetual in duration. However, Caltech has the right to convert the license to a non-exclusive license if we fail to utilize the licensed technology for a period of 18 or more consecutive months, provided that Caltech must give us 180-days advance written notice of the conversion and we may cure the failure at any time during the 180-day notice period. If we cure the failure, then the license will not be converted into a non-exclusive license.

Under the license agreement, we have the right to sublicense any of the licensed technology or patents. The license agreement also provides that Caltech reserves the right to use the licensed technology and patents for noncommercial educational and research purposes. The patents and patent applications that we license from Caltech relate primarily to the composition and processing of our alloys. The currently issued U.S. patents covered by the license agreement will expire between 2012 and 2013.

Under the Caltech license agreement, the parties are obligated to provide reasonable cooperation to each other in connection with any threatened or actual infringement of the licensed technology by third parties. We have the right to commence an action for infringement of any of the licensed technology, and although Caltech is not obligated to bring suit or take action against infringers, Caltech is obligated to join in any such lawsuit upon our request.

In addition to the patents and patent applications that we license from Caltech, we are building a portfolio of our own patents to expand and enhance our technology position. These patents and patent applications primarily relate to various applications of our bulk amorphous alloys, the composition of our coatings and powders, and the processing of our alloys. The patents relating to our coatings expire on various dates between 2006 and 2017, and the patents relating to our bulk amorphous alloys expire on various dates between 2013 and 2021. Our policy is to seek patent protection for all technology, inventions, and improvements that are of commercial importance to the development of our business, except to the extent that we believe it is advisable to maintain such technology or invention as a trade secret.

10

In order to protect the confidentiality of our technology, including trade secrets, know-how, and other proprietary technical and business information, we require that all of our employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators enter into confidentiality agreements that prohibit the use or disclosure of information that is deemed confidential. The agreements also obligate our employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators to assign to us developments, discoveries and inventions made by such persons in connection with their work with us.

Research and Development

We are engaged in ongoing research and development programs that are driven by the following key objectives:

•                   Enhance Material Processing and Manufacturing Efficiencies. We plan to continue research and development of processes and compositions that will decrease our cost of making products from Liquidmetal alloys.

•                   Optimize Existing Alloys and Develop New Compositions. We believe that the primary technology driver of our business will continue to be our proprietary alloy compositions. We plan to continue research and development on new alloy compositions to generate a broader class of amorphous alloys with a wider range of specialized performance characteristics. During 2003 and continuing into 2005, we have successfully expanded our portfolio of bulk amorphous alloys to include additional zirconium-titanium alloys, as well as alloys based on other metals, such as iron, gold, and platinum. Although these various compositions are at different stages of development and only a few are currently suitable for commercial use, we believe that a larger alloy portfolio will enable us to increase the attractiveness of our alloys as an alternative to incumbent materials and, in certain cases, drive down product costs. We also believe that our ability to optimize our existing alloy compositions will enable us to better tailor our alloys to our customers’ specific application requirements.

•                   Develop New Applications. We will continue research and development of new applications for Liquidmetal alloys. We believe the range of potential applications will broaden by expanding the forms, compositions, and methods of processing of our alloys.

We conduct our research and development programs internally and also through strategic relationships that we enter into with third parties. Our internal research and development efforts are currently focused on product and process development. Our internal research and development efforts are conducted by a team of 15 scientists, engineers and researchers whom we either employ directly or engage as consultants. Included among this team are Professor William Johnson, who discovered our initial bulk amorphous alloy at Caltech in 1993, and his graduate student at the time, Atakan Peker, who is employed as our Vice President of Technology. Professor Johnson was an employee of our company from October 2001 through December 2003 and then became a consultant to the Company. Professor Johnson continues to be a member of our board of directors.

In addition to our internal research and development efforts, we enter into cooperative research and development relationships with leading academic institutions. Professor Johnson continues to supervise a laboratory at Caltech, and through our license agreement with Caltech, we have a continuing relationship with the other researchers in Professor Johnson’s Caltech laboratory. We have also entered into research relationships with several other academic institutions for the conduct of research relating to the properties and characteristics of our alloys.

We have entered into development relationships with other companies for the purpose of identifying new applications for our alloys and establishing customer relationships with such companies. Some of our product development programs are partially funded by our customers. We are also engaged in negotiations with other potential customers regarding possible product development relationships. Our research and development expenses for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003 were $1.1 million, $1.5 million, and $8.8 million, respectively.

Manufacturing

We currently own and operate a 166,000 square foot manufacturing facility in Pyongtaek, South Korea, which became operational in the third quarter of 2002. We opened a 14,400 square foot facility in Weihai, China in August 2004 to facilitate our bulk alloy manufacturing business. We believe that these facilities will meet our anticipated manufacturing needs for the foreseeable future, although these needs may change depending upon the actual and forecasted orders we receive for our products. We currently intend to develop supplemental research and development, prototyping and manufacturing capabilities elsewhere, including the United States, for purposes of meeting our long-term manufacturing needs and our customers’ requirements. In December 2003, we entered into a license agreement

11

with Florida Custom Mold, Inc., a Clearwater, Florida-based company that specializes in high-quality mold design and injection molding services, under which Florida Custom Mold is currently acting as a contract manufacturer to our company for purposes of producing prototypes of certain defense and medical products in the US.

Raw Materials

Liquidmetal alloy compositions are comprised of many elements, all of which are available commodity products. We believe that each of these raw materials is readily available in sufficient quantities from multiple sources on commercially acceptable terms. However, any substantial increase in the price or interruption in the supply of these materials could have an adverse effect on our profitability.

Customers

During 2005, one customer accounted for 10% or more of our revenue from continuing operations. Revenues from Samsung represented 10% of revenues from continuing operation for the year ended 2005. During 2004, four customers accounted for 10% or more of our revenue from continuing operations. Revenues from Charm Tech and Pntel, both of which are direct suppliers to Samsung, represented 62% of revenue from continuing operations for the year ended 2004. Also, revenues from defense related contracts with the United States of America represented 10% and Growell Metal represented 12% of revenue from continuing operations for the year ended 2004. We expect that a significant portion of our revenue may continue to be concentrated in a limited number of customers, even as our bulk Liquidmetal alloy business grows. During 2003, three customers accounted for 10% or more of our revenue from continuing operations. Revenue from Samsung represented 10% of revenue, revenue from LLPG, Inc. represented 12% and defense-related contracts with three departments of the United States of America represented 16% of revenue from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Competition

We are not aware of any other company or business that manufactures, markets, distributes, or sells bulk amorphous alloys or products made from bulk amorphous alloys. We believe it would be difficult to develop a competitive bulk amorphous alloy without infringing our patents. However, our bulk Liquidmetal alloys face competition from other materials, including metals, alloys, plastics and composites, which are currently used in the commercial applications that we pursue. For example, we face significant competition from plastics and zinc in our electronics components business, and titanium and composites will continue to be used widely in medical devices and sporting goods. Based on our experience with developing products for a variety of customers, we believe that the selection of materials by potential customers will continue to be product-specific in nature, with the decision for each product being driven primarily by the performance needs of the application and secondarily by cost considerations and design flexibility. Because of the relatively high strength of our alloys and the design flexibility of our process, we are most competitive when the customer is seeking a higher strength as well as greater design flexibility than currently available with other materials. However, if currently available materials, such as plastics, are strong enough for the application, our alloys are often not competitive those applications with respect to price. We also believe that our alloys are generally not competitive with the cost of some of the basic metals, such as steel, aluminum or copper, when such basic metals can be used in specific applications, but our alloys are generally more competitive with price on more exotic metals, such as titanium. Our alloys could also face competition from new materials that may be developed in the future, including new materials that could render our alloys obsolete.

Our Liquidmetal alloy coatings face competition from industrial coatings currently manufactured or sold by other companies. At present, the primary competitors of our coatings business are Varco International, Inc. and Arnco Technology Trust, Limited. Although we believe, based on market data gathered by us, that our coatings compete favorably with these companies’ products and that we continue to maintain the dominant market share with respect to protective coatings for oil drill pipe and casings, these competitors are larger well-established businesses that have substantially greater financial, marketing, and other resources than we do.

We will also experience indirect competition from the competitors of our customers. Because we will rely on our customers to market and sell finished goods that incorporate our components or products, our success will depend in part on the ability of our customers to effectively market and sell their own products and compete in their respective markets.

12

Backlog

In our bulk alloy segment, because of the minimal lead-time associated with orders of bulk alloy parts, we generally do not carry a significant backlog. In our coatings segment, we typically ship our coating products shortly after receipt of an order, and our coatings backlog is therefore also insignificant. In both our bulk alloy segment and coatings segment, the backlog as of any particular date gives no indication of actual sales for any succeeding period.

Sales and Marketing

We direct our marketing efforts towards customers that will incorporate our components and products into their finished goods. To that end, we will continue to hire business development personnel who, in conjunction with engineers and scientists, will actively identify potential customers that may be able to benefit from the introduction of Liquidmetal alloys to their products. In some cases, we will develop applications in conjunction with existing or potential customers. By adopting this strategy, we intend to take advantage of the sales and marketing forces and distribution channels of our customers to facilitate the commercialization of our alloys. We also direct business development efforts toward companies who we believe could be viable candidates for potential partnering transactions, such as licensing relationships, distribution arrangements, joint ventures, and the like.

Employees

As of December 31, 2005, we had 352 full-time employees. As of that date, 78 of our Korean operation employees were represented by a labor union. We have not experienced any work stoppages and we consider our employee relations to be favorable.

Governmental Regulation

Medical instruments incorporating our Liquidmetal alloys will be subject to regulation in the United States by the FDA and corresponding state and foreign regulatory agencies. Any orthopedic devices that we develop will be regulated in a similar manner. Medical device manufacturers to whom we intend to sell our products may need to obtain FDA approval before marketing their medical devices that incorporate our products. Medical device manufacturers may need to obtain similar approvals before marketing these medical device products in foreign countries.

Because we intend to sell our medical device products to medical device manufacturers, we do not believe that we will need to obtain FDA approval or similar foreign approvals before selling products to medical device manufacturers. Nonetheless, as a manufacturer of medical device components, we would be subject to quality control and record keeping requirements of FDA and other federal and state statutes and regulations, as well as similar regulations in foreign countries.

The process of obtaining and maintaining required FDA and foreign regulatory approvals for medical devices that incorporate our products could be lengthy, expensive, and uncertain for our customers. Additionally, regulatory agencies can delay or prevent product introductions. Generally, before a medical device manufacturer can market a product incorporating one of our products, our customer must obtain for their finished product marketing clearance through a 510(k) premarket notification or approval of a pre-market approval application, or PMA. The FDA will typically grant a 510(k) clearance if the applicant can establish that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device. It generally takes a number of months from the date of a 510(k) submission to obtain clearance, but it may take longer, particularly if a clinical trial is required.

The FDA may find that a 510(k) is not appropriate for a medical device that incorporates our product or that substantial equivalence has not been shown and as a result will require a PMA. A PMA application must be submitted if a proposed medical device does not qualify for a 510(k) pre-market clearance procedure. PMA applications must be supported by valid scientific evidence to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the device, typically including the results of clinical trials, bench tests, and laboratory and animal studies. The PMA process can be expensive, uncertain and lengthy, requires detailed and comprehensive data, and generally takes significantly longer than the 510(k) process. Additionally, the FDA may never approve the PMA.

Similar regulations in foreign countries vary significantly from country to country and with respect to the nature of the particular medical device. The time required to obtain these foreign approvals to market our products may be longer or shorter than that required in the United States, and requirements for such approval may differ from FDA requirements.

13

Environmental Law Compliance

Our manufacturing operations are subject to national, state, and local environmental laws in China, South Korea, and the United States. We believe that we are in material compliance with all applicable environmental regulations. While we continue to incur costs to comply with environmental regulations, we do not believe that such costs will have a material effect on our capital expenditures, earnings, or competitive position.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

This report contains forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) that are based on management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about the Company and its business. In addition, other written or oral statements which constitute forward-looking statements may be made from time to time by or on behalf of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. Any statement in this report that is not a statement of historical fact is a forward-looking statement, and in some cases, words such as “believe,” “estimate,” “project,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “anticipate,” “plans,” “seeks,” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from the anticipated outcomes or result. These statements are not guarantees of future performance, and undue reliance should not be placed on these statements. Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. undertakes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in our forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following:

We have incurred significant operating losses in the past and may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability in the future.

We have experienced significant operating losses since our inception. Our net loss for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003 was $11.2 million, $12.7 million and $33.6 million, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit of approximately $136.6 million at December 31, 2005. Of this accumulated deficit, $44.5 million was attributable to losses generated by our discontinued equipment manufacturing and retail golf businesses through December 31, 2005. We anticipate that we may continue to incur operating losses for the foreseeable future. Consequently, it is possible that we may never achieve positive earnings and, if we do achieve positive earnings, we may not be able to achieve them on a sustainable basis.

We may require additional funding, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.

Our future capital requirements will depend on the amount of cash generated by our operations. Our projections of cash flows from operations and, consequently, future cash needs are subject to substantial uncertainty. In addition, in our audit report on our financial statements for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, our auditors included a going-concern qualification indicating that our significant operating losses and working capital deficit cause substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our operating plan is based on assumptions that are uncertain or otherwise subject to change. If our available funds and cash generated from operations are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we will need additional funds in the future to support our working capital requirements and for other purposes, and we anticipate that we will need to raise additional funds through public or private equity financing, bank debt financing, or from other sources. Adequate funds may not be available when needed or may not be available on favorable terms. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, existing stockholders may be diluted. If funding is insufficient at any time in the future, we may not be able to develop or enhance our products or services, take advantage of business opportunities, or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could harm our business.

We have a limited history of developing, manufacturing, and selling products made from our bulk amorphous alloys.

We have marketed and sold industrial coatings to distributors in the coatings industry since 1987. Prior to the third quarter of 2002, our experience selling products made from bulk amorphous alloys has been limited to our discontinued retail golf business, which had a different marketing strategy than the one we are currently employing. Therefore, we have a relatively limited history of producing bulk amorphous alloy components and products on a mass-production basis. Furthermore, our ability to produce our products in desired quantities and at commercially reasonable prices is

14

uncertain and is dependent on a variety of factors that are outside of our control, including the nature and design of the component, the customer’s specifications, and required delivery timelines.

We rely on assumptions about the markets for our products and components that, if incorrect, may adversely affect our profitability.

We have a relatively short history producing bulk amorphous alloy components on a mass-production basis. We have made assumptions regarding the market size for, and the manufacturing requirements of, our products and components based in part on information we received from third parties and also from our limited history. If these assumptions prove to be incorrect, we may not achieve anticipated revenue targets or profitability.

If we cannot establish and maintain relationships with customers that incorporate our components and products into their finished goods, we will not be able to increase our revenue and commercialize our products.

Our business is based upon the commercialization of a new and unique materials technology. Our ability to increase our revenues will depend on our ability to successfully maintain and establish relationships with customers who are willing to incorporate our proprietary alloys and technology into their finished products. However, we believe that the size of our company and the newness of our technology and manufacturing process may continue to make it challenging to maintain and establish such relationships. In addition, we rely and will continue to rely to a large extent on the manufacturing, research, and development capabilities, as well as the marketing and distribution capabilities, of our customers in order to commercialize our products. Our future growth and success will depend in large part on our ability to enter into these relationships and the subsequent success of these relationships. If our products are selected for use in a customer’s products, we still may not realize significant revenue from that customer if that customer’s products are not commercially successful.

It may take significant time and cost for us to develop new customer relationships, which may delay our ability to generate additional revenue or achieve profitability.

Our ability to generate revenue from new customers is generally affected by the amount of time it takes for us to, among other things:

•                   identify a potential customer and introduce the customer to Liquidmetal alloys;

•                   work with the customer to select and design the parts to be fabricated from Liquidmetal alloys;

•                   make the molds and tooling to be used to produce the selected part;

•                   with respect to some types of products, such as medical devices, to obtain regulatory approval.

We currently do not have a sufficient history of selling products made from our bulk amorphous alloys to predict accurately the length of our average sales cycle. We believe that our average sales cycle from the time we deliver an active proposal to a customer until the time our customer fully integrates our bulk amorphous alloys into its product could be a significant period of time. Our history to date has demonstrated that the sales cycle could extend significantly longer than we anticipate. The time it takes to transition a customer from limited production to full-scale production runs will depend upon the nature of the processes and products into which our alloys are integrated. Moreover, we have found that customers often proceed very cautiously and slowly before incorporating a fundamentally new and unique type of material into their products.

After we develop a customer relationship, it may take a significant amount of time for that customer to develop, manufacture, and sell finished goods that incorporate our components and products.

15

Our experience has shown that our customers will perform numerous tests and extensively evaluate our components and products before incorporating them into their finished products. The time required for testing, evaluating, and designing our components and products into a customer’s products, and in some cases, obtaining regulatory approval, can take a significant amount of time, with an additional period of time before a customer commences volume production of products incorporating our components and products, if ever. Moreover, because of this lengthy development cycle, we may experience a delay between the time we accrue expenses for research and development and sales and marketing efforts and the time when we generate revenue, if any. We may incur substantial costs in an attempt to transition a customer from initial testing to prototype and from prototype to final product. If we are unable to minimize these transition costs, or to recover the costs of these transitions from our customers, our operating results will be adversely affected.

A limited number of our customers generate a significant portion of our revenue.

For the near future, we expect that a significant portion of our revenue will be concentrated in a limited number of customers. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2005, revenues from one customer, Samsung, represented approximately 10% of total revenue from continuing operations, and for the year ended December 31, 2004, revenue from two customers represented approximately 62% of total revenue from continuing operations, and for the year ended December 31, 2003, revenue from two customers represented approximately 26% of total revenue from continuing operations. Revenues from direct suppliers to Samsung represented approximately 14% and 62% of total revenues from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Also, revenues from defense related contracts with the United States of America represented 10%, and Growell Metal represented 12%, of revenue from continuing operations for the year ended 2004. A reduction, delay, or cancellation of orders from one or more of these customers or the loss of one or more customer relationships could significantly reduce our revenue. Unless we establish long-term sales arrangements with these customers, they will have the ability to reduce or discontinue their purchases of our products on short notice.

We expect to rely on our customers to market and sell finished goods that incorporate our products and components, a process over which we will have little control.

Our future revenue growth and ultimate profitability will depend in part on the ability of our customers to successfully market and sell their finished goods that incorporate our products. We will have little control over our customers’ marketing and sales efforts. These marketing and sales efforts may be unsuccessful for various reasons, any of which could hinder our ability to increase revenue or achieve profitability. For example, our customers may not have or devote sufficient resources to develop, market, and sell their finished goods that incorporate our products. Because we typically will not have exclusive sales arrangements with our customers, they will not be precluded from exploring and adopting competing technologies. Also, products incorporating competing technologies may be more successful for reasons unrelated to the performance of our customers’ products or the marketing efforts of our customers.

Our growth depends on our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize new applications for our technology.

Our future growth and success will depend in part on our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize, either alone or in conjunction with our customers, new applications and uses for Liquidmetal alloys. If we are unable to identify and develop new applications, we may be unable to develop new products or generate additional revenue. Successful development of new applications for our products may require additional investment, including costs associated with research and development and the identification of new customers. In addition, difficulties in developing and achieving market acceptance of new products would harm our business.

We may not be able to effectively compete with current suppliers of incumbent materials or producers of competing products.

The future growth and success of our bulk amorphous alloy business will depend in part on our ability to establish and retain a technological advantage over other materials for our targeted applications. For many of our targeted applications, we will compete with manufacturers of similar products that use different materials. These different materials may include plastics, titanium alloys, or stainless steel, among others. For example, we have targeted the cellular phone component market as an application for bulk Liquidmetal alloys. In this market, we believe we will compete with other manufacturers of cellular phone components who use plastics or metal to construct their components. These other manufacturers may be able to manufacture their cellular phone components, particularly those made from plastics, at significantly less cost than

16

our alloys. In other markets, we will compete directly with suppliers of the incumbent material. In addition, in each of our targeted markets, our success will depend in part on the ability of our customers to compete successfully in their respective markets. Thus, even if we are successful in replacing an incumbent material in a finished product, we will remain subject to the risk that our customer will not compete successfully in its own market.

Our bulk amorphous alloy technology is still at an early stage of commercialization relative to many other materials.

Our bulk amorphous alloy technology is a relatively new technology as compared to many other material technologies, such as plastics and widely-used high-performance crystalline alloys. Historically, the successful commercialization of a new materials technology has required the persistent improvement and refining of the technology over a sometimes lengthy period of time. Accordingly, we believe that our Company’s future success will be dependent on our ability to continue expanding and improving our technology platform by, among other things, constantly refining and improving our manufacturing processes, optimizing our existing amorphous alloy compositions for various applications, and developing and improving new bulk amorphous alloy compositions. Our failure to further expand our technology base could limit our growth opportunities and hamper our commercialization efforts.

Future advances in materials science could render Liquidmetal alloys obsolete.

Academic institutions and business enterprises frequently engage in the research and testing of new materials, including alloys and plastics. Advances in materials science could lead to new materials that have a more favorable combination of performance, processing, and cost characteristics than our alloys. The future development of any such new materials could render our alloys obsolete and unmarketable or may impair our ability to compete effectively.

Our growth depends upon our ability to retain and attract a sufficient number of qualified employees.

Our business is based upon the commercialization of a new and unique materials technology. Our future growth and success will depend in part on our ability to retain key members of our management and scientific staff, who are familiar with this technology and the potential applications and markets for it. For example, as a result of their experience and knowledge of our alloy technology, we believe that our future growth and success will depend in large part on the efforts of John Kang, our Chairman of the board of directors, and Dr. Atakan Peker, our Vice President of Technology. We do not have “key man” or similar insurance on any of these individuals. If we lose their services or the services of other key personnel, our financial results or business prospects may be harmed. Additionally, our future growth and success will depend in part on our ability to attract, train, and retain scientific engineering, manufacturing, sales, marketing, and management personnel. We cannot be certain that we will be able to attract and retain the personnel necessary to manage our operations effectively. Competition for experienced executives and scientists from numerous companies and academic and other research institutions may limit our ability to hire or retain personnel on acceptable terms. In addition, many of the companies with which we compete for experienced personnel have greater financial and other resources than we do. Moreover, the employment of non-citizens may be restricted by applicable immigration laws.

On December 15, 2005, an indictment naming as defendants ten former officers and directors of Medical Manager Corporation, including our Chairman, John Kang, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina (Beaufort Division). Medical Manager Corporation was a publicly traded company in which Mr. Kang was formerly the President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Kang was charged in counts for conspiracy to commit securities fraud, conspiracy to commit mail fraud and conspiracy to launder money instruments relating to a series of acquisitions that were made by Medical Manager during the years 1996 through 2003, the accounting practices of Medical Manager during that time frame, and the filing of various financial statements during that time frame. Although the indictment is unrelated to Mr. Kang’s service as a director and officer of our company, Mr. Kang resigned as our President and Chief Executive Officer on December 30, 2005; however, he continues to serve as Chairman of the Board of our company and continues to work for the company on a full-time basis. Mr. Kang as pled “not guilty” to the indictment and plans to contest the charges vigorously. At this time, however, we cannot estimate the potential impact on our company, if any, that might result from these charges.

We may not be able to successfully identify, consummate, or integrate strategic partnerships.

As a part of our business strategy, we intend to pursue strategic partnering transactions that provide access to new technologies, products, markets, and manufacturing capabilities. These transactions could include licensing agreements, joint ventures, or even business combinations. We believe that these transactions will be particularly important to our future growth and success due to the size and resources of our company and the newness of our technology. For example, we may determine that we may need to license our technology to a larger manufacturer in order to penetrate a particular

17

market. In addition, we may pursue transactions that will give us access to new technologies that are useful in connection with the composition, processing, or application of Liquidmetal alloys. We may not be able to successfully identify any potential strategic partnerships. Even if we do identify one or more potentially beneficial strategic partnering, we may not be able to consummate these transactions on favorable terms or obtain the benefits we anticipate from such a transaction.

We may encounter manufacturing problems or delays or may be unable to produce high-quality products at acceptable costs.

We have relatively limited experience in manufacturing our products and may be required to manufacture a range of products in high volumes while ensuring high quality and consistency. Although we currently own and operate a 166,000 square feet and a 14,400 square feet manufacturing facilities in South Korea and China, respectively, we cannot guarantee that these facilities will be able to produce the intended products with production yields, quality controls, and production costs that provide us with acceptable margins or profitability or satisfy the requirements of our customers.

We expect to derive a substantial portion of our revenue from sales outside the United States, and problems associated with international business operations could affect our ability to manufacture and sell our products.

We expect that we will continue to manufacture a substantial portion of our initial bulk Liquidmetal alloy products in our South Korean facility and derive a material portion of our revenues from customers in South Korea. For our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, approximately 31%, 54%, and 34% of our revenues came from customers located in South Korea, respectively. As a result, our manufacturing operations and financial results are subject to risks of political instability, including the risk of conflict between North Korea and South Korea and tensions between the United States and North Korea. In addition, we anticipate that the trend of foreign customers accounting for a significant portion of our total revenues may continue. Specifically, we expect to continue to derive a significant amount of revenue from sales to customers located in Asia. A downturn in the economies of Asian countries where our products will be sold, particularly South Korea’s economy, could materially harm our business.

Consequently, our operations and revenue likely will be subject to a number of risks associated with foreign commerce, including:

•                   staffing and managing our manufacturing facility located in South Korea and post-processing facility located in China;

•                   product or material transportation delays or disruption, including the availability and costs of air and other transportation between our South Korean and Chinese facilities and the United States;

•                   political and economic instability, including instability involving China and North Korea that may disrupt our operations in China and South Korea;

•                   potentially adverse tax consequences, which may reduce the profitability of products manufactured overseas or sold to overseas customers;

•                   burden of complying with complex foreign laws and treaties, which could limit our ability to conduct our business as contemplated in South Korea and China; and

•                   trade protection laws, policies, and measures and other regulatory requirements affecting trade and investment that could adversely affect the profitability of our South Korean and Chinese Operations, including loss or modification of exemptions for taxes and tariffs.

Moreover, customers may sell finished goods that incorporate our components and products outside of the United States, which exposes us indirectly to additional foreign commerce risks.

A substantial increase in the price or interruption in the supply of raw materials for our alloys could have an adverse effect on our profitability.

Our proprietary alloy compositions are comprised of many elements, all of which are available commodity products. Although we believe that each of these raw materials is currently readily available in sufficient quantities from multiple sources on commercially acceptable terms, if the prices of these materials substantially increases or there is an interruption

18

in the supply of these materials, such increase or interruption could adversely affect our profitability. For example, if the price of one of the elements included in our alloys substantially increases, we may not be able to pass the price increase on to our customers.

Our business is subject to the potential adverse consequences of exchange rate fluctuations.

We expect to conduct business in various foreign currencies and will be exposed to market risk from changes in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. Fluctuations in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and such foreign currencies may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition and could specifically result in foreign exchange gains and losses. The impact of future exchange rate fluctuations on our operations cannot be accurately predicted. To the extent that the percentage of our non-U.S. dollar revenue derived from international sales increases in the future, our exposure to risks associated with fluctuations in foreign exchange rates will increase further. Moreover, as a result of operating a manufacturing facility in South Korea, a substantial portion of our costs are and will continue to be denominated in the South Korean won. Adverse changes in the exchange rates of the South Korean won to the U.S. dollar will affect our costs of goods sold and operating margins and could result in exchange losses. The average foreign exchange rates for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003 were 1,028, 1,151, and 1,195 South Korean Won to the U.S. dollar, respectively. The fluctuations in the exchange rates resulted in foreign currency translation gains of $0.3 million, $1.7 million, and $0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.

Our inability to protect our licenses, patents, and proprietary rights in the United States and foreign countries could harm our business because third parties may take advantage of our research and development efforts.

We have an exclusive license from Caltech to several patents and patent applications relating to amorphous alloy technology, and we have obtained several of our own patents. We also have the exclusive right to Caltech’s inventions, proprietary information, know-how, and other technology relating to bulk amorphous alloys existing as of September 1, 2001. Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary right protection for our technologies and products in the United States and other countries. If we are unable to obtain or maintain these protections, we may not be able to prevent third parties from using our proprietary rights. Specifically, we must:

•                   protect and enforce our license agreement with Caltech and our own patents and intellectual property;

•                   exploit our license of the patented technology under our license agreement with Caltech as well as our own patents; and

•                   operate our business without infringing on the intellectual property rights of third parties.

Caltech owns several issued United States patents covering the composition and method of manufacturing of the family of Liquidmetal alloys. We also hold several United States and corresponding foreign patents covering the manufacturing processes of Liquidmetal alloys and their use. The patents relating to our coatings expire on various dates between 2005 and 2022, and those relating to our bulk amorphous alloys between 2013 and 2025. If we are unable to protect our proprietary rights prior to the expiration of these patents, we may lose the advantage we have established as being the first to market bulk amorphous alloy products. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and we may encounter significant problems and costs in protecting our proprietary rights in these foreign countries.

Patent law is still evolving relative to the scope and enforceability of claims in the fields in which we operate. Our patent protection involves complex legal and technical questions. Our patents and those patents for which we have license rights may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated, or circumvented. We may be able to protect our proprietary rights from infringement by third parties only to the extent that our proprietary technologies are covered by valid and enforceable patents or are effectively maintained as trade secrets. Furthermore, others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or design around our patented technologies. Litigation or other proceedings to defend or enforce our intellectual property rights could require us to spend significant time and money and could otherwise adversely affect our business.

Other companies may claim that we infringe their intellectual property rights, which could cause us to incur significant expenses or prevent us from selling our products.

19

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to operate without infringing on valid, enforceable patents or proprietary rights of third parties and not breaching any licenses that may relate to our technology and products. Future patents issued to third parties may contain claims that conflict with our patents and that compete with our products and technologies, and third parties could assert infringement claims against us. Any litigation or interference proceedings, regardless of their outcome, may be costly and may require significant time and attention of our management and technical personnel. Litigation or interference proceedings could also force us to:

•                   stop or delay using our technology;

•                   stop or delay our customers from selling, manufacturing or using products that incorporate the challenged intellectual property;

•                   pay damages; or

•                   enter into licensing or royalty agreements that may be unavailable on acceptable terms.

Our level of indebtedness reduces our financial flexibility and could impede our ability to operate.

As of December 31, 2005, our long-term debt was $15.1 million, including the current portion of such debt. Our long-term debt (including the current portion) includes the following:

•                   $2.8 million in principal outstanding under our Korean subsidiary’s loan from Kookmin Bank of South Korea;

•                   $2.4 million in principal outstanding under convertible notes issued in our August 19, 2004 private exchange; and

•                   $9.9 million in principal outstanding under convertible notes issued in our August 2, 2005 private placement.

Under our loan from Kookmin Bank, we are obligated to make equal monthly payments of principal and interest of $0.11 million each through the period ending in September 2007. Under our 6% Senior Secured Notes due July 2007 and 7% Senior Secured Notes due August 2007, we are required to make cash interest payments to the noteholders of $0.22 million per quarter until such notes are converted or paid. Unless such notes are converted, the $2.4 million in aggregate principal amount under our 6% Senior Secured Notes due July 2007 will become due in July 2007, provided that the holders of such notes may demand payment thereunder in July 2006. The $9.9 million in aggregate principal amount under our 7% Senior Secured Notes due August 2007 will become due in August 2007.

Our level of debt affects our operations in several important ways, including the following:

•                   a significant portion of our cash flow from operations is likely to be dedicated to the payment of the principal of and interest on our indebtedness;

•                   we may be unable to refinance our indebtedness on terms acceptable to us or at all;

•                   our cash flow may be insufficient to meet our required principal and interest payments; and

•                   we may be unable to obtain additional loans as a result of covenants and agreements with existing debt holders.

In addition, our convertible notes and related documents contain restrictive covenants pursuant to which we generally may not (i) incur any indebtedness that would be senior to, or on the same rank as, the convertible notes with respect to payment or security, (ii) grant any liens or security interests in any of our assets which serve as collateral for the convertible notes (which collateral consists of substantially all of our assets), (iii) with certain exceptions, sell any of the assets that constitute collateral for the notes, (iv) become a guarantor for a third-party’s obligation (other than guarantees in the ordinary course of business not in excess of $500,000 in the aggregate), (v) acquire any shares or securities of any other person or entity in excess of an aggregate of $1.0 million over any rolling 12-month period, (vi) purchase or otherwise acquire any assets in excess of an aggregate of $3.0 million over any rolling 12-month period, (vii) engage in any transaction resulting in the issuance to any person of more than 40% of the equity of our company, or (viii) engage in any

20

merger or sale of all or substantially all of our business assets. These covenants may curtail our ability to raise capital in the future or otherwise restrict our ability to enter into a transaction that we believe would be in the best interest of our stockholders.

If we default on the convertible notes that we have issued, the noteholders may accelerate the amounts due under such notes and may foreclose on the security interests that secure the notes.

As of December 31, 2005, we had approximately $12.3 million in principal amount of convertible notes outstanding. Approximately $2.4 million in principal amount of convertible notes will become due in July 2007, with the balance becoming due in August 2007. Interest on our convertible notes is payable quarterly in cash. These notes are secured by substantially all of the assets of our company. We will be deemed to be in default under these notes if we fail to pay any principal or interest when it becomes due, and we will also be deemed to be in default if we breach any other material provision of our other agreements with the noteholders and we fail to cure such breach within thirty days of notice of default. Upon a default under these notes, the noteholders have the right to accelerate the maturity date of the notes and demand that they be immediately repaid by us. If we fail to pay such notes, either at maturity or upon acceleration, then the noteholders may elect to foreclose upon the assets securing the notes.

We have not complied with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for our fiscal years ended December 31, 2005, and 2004.

As directed by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or SOX, the SEC has adopted rules requiring public companies to include a report of management on the company’s internal controls over financial reporting in their annual reports on Form 10-K. In addition, the public accounting firm auditing a public company’s financial statements must attest to and report on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the company’s internal controls over financial reporting. Although these requirements were first applicable to our annual report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, we were unable to comply with these requirements for such fiscal year. As disclosed in our amended Form 10-K filed with the SEC on May 10, 2005, the time and resources necessary to complete the restatement of prior periods’ financial statements delayed our ability to complete the internal documentation, assessment and evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, all of which are required to be undertaken to comply with Section 404 of SOX. This delay prevented our independent auditor from being able to satisfactorily complete a timely audit of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004. As a result, investors may not be able to rely on our financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 and 2005.

Due to these delays, we and our independent auditor determined that it would not be possible to complete the management’s assessment and auditor’s audit of our internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, and accordingly our independent auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion with respect to our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, and such disclaimer was filed with our amended Form 10-K filed on May 10, 2005. The filing of this disclaimer does not comply with the SEC’s rules and regulations under Section 404, and this noncompliance has resulted in us being in violation of Section 13(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Section 13(a) establishes the general requirement that public companies must file with the SEC, in accordance with such rules and regulations as the SEC may prescribe, such information, documents, and reports as the SEC may from time to time require for the protection of investors, including Form 10-Ks and 10-Qs.

In general, the SEC has broad authority under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to institute investigations, to seek injunctions, to seek monetary penalties, and to otherwise pursue enforcement actions for violations of Section 13(a), including a failure to file a Form 10-K or for the omission of necessary statements in a Form 10-K. Therefore, a violation under Section 404 of SOX or Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 could potentially subject an issuer to these same investigations and penalties. Section 404 of SOX is a relatively new legal requirement, and there is very little precedent establishing the consequences or appropriate response to a public company’s failure to comply with Section 404. Accordingly, although we have discussed our Section 404 noncompliance with the SEC, we cannot predict what action, if any, the SEC may take against our company as a result of a failure to be compliant with our obligations under Section 404 of SOX or Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Effective December 27, 2005, the SEC announced final rulings on revisions to accelerated filer definition and deadlines for periodic reports. The ruling revised the definition of the term “accelerated filer” to permit an accelerated filer that has voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of less than $50 million to exit accelerated filer status at the end of the fiscal year in which its equity falls below $50 million and to file its annual report for that year and subsequent periodic reports on a non-accelerated basis. As of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, we are considered an accelerated filer and are required to comply with SOX 404 requirements for the 2005 fiscal year.

21

In addition to the foregoing, although our common stock was admitted to the OTC Bulletin Board for quotation on June 15, 2005, as a result of our noncompliance with Section 404 for our 2005 fiscal year, it may not have been appropriate for the OTC Bulletin Board to admit our common stock for quotation on June 15, 2005. Consequently, there is no assurance that our common stock will remain eligible for quotation on the OTC Bulletin Board.

The Company has devoted significant amount of financial and internal resources during 2005 and early part of 2006 to ensure compliance with SOX 404, and on January 16, 2006, Company’s management believes that the Company has substantially completed its documentation, assessment and evaluation of its internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005. However, our independent auditors, Stonefield Josephson Inc., resigned on December 1, 2005, and on January 20, 2006, the Company hired Choi, Kim & Park LLP (“CKP”) as its new independent registered public accounting firm. While the Company has advised CKP of the foregoing weaknesses in internal controls, due to the untimeliness of the foregoing events, CKP was unable to satisfactorily complete their audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting pursuant to SOX 404, and thus, have issued a disclaimer of an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005. The Company’s management will continue to monitor potential changes in the legal and regulatory requirements of SOX 404, particularly the requirements for small public companies.

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and have determined that our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective.

Our former independent auditors, Stonefield Josephson, Inc., have notified the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors that they believed there were reportable conditions during 2004 and 2005 which constituted material weaknesses in our internal controls. The following material weaknesses have been identified:

•                   Lack of adequate segregation of duties in our South Korean operations in accounts receivable involving cash receipts, shipping, delivery of products and customer invoice reconciliations.

•                   Lack of adequate segregation of duties in our Coatings Division in Texas in order processing and invoicing.

•                   Lack of adequate controls and documentation in our South Korean operations to evidence proper customer invoicing and revenue recognition in the proper period.

•                   Lack of progress in documenting, assessing and evaluating our internal controls in our South Korean operations.

•                   Lack of controls over internal access to our SAP system of reporting by unauthorized users.

•                   Manual performance of numerous procedures that could be automated using current reporting systems.

In addition to the foregoing, after a review of our operating results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 and for the quarters ended March 31, 2005, June 30, 2005, and September 30, 2005, and pursuant to Rule 13a-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have determined that, as of each such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective to provide reasonable assurance that information that we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms. Our management reached this conclusion based on the above-described material weaknesses.

Effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a public company. We have in the past discovered, as described above, and may in the future discover, areas of our disclosure and internal controls that need improvement. We are in the process of addressing these issues to ensure that our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures are improved so as to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms. If, however, we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our reputation and operating results would be harmed.

We cannot be certain that our efforts to improve the material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and the ineffectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures will be successful or that we will be able to maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future. We will need to commit substantial resources,

22

including substantial time from our management team’s accounting personnel and from external consultants, to implement and integrate into our organization improved disclosure controls and additional procedures generally and to improve systems to report financial information on a timely basis. Any failure or delay to develop or maintain effective controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation or in other effective improvement of our internal and disclosure controls could materially harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Ineffective internal and disclosure controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which would likely have a significant negative effect on the trading price of our securities.

The restatement of our 2003 and 2002 consolidated financial statements has had a material adverse impact on us.

We previously determined that our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, as described in more detail in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included in the form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, filed on November 10, 2004, should be restated. As a result of this restatement, we have become subject to a number of additional risks and uncertainties.

•                   We incurred substantial unanticipated costs for accounting and legal fees in 2004 in connection with the restatement.

•                   Due to the time and resources necessary to complete the restatement, we and our independent auditor determined that it was not possible to complete the management’s assessment and auditor’s audit of our internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and, accordingly, our independent auditor issued a disclaimer of opinion with respect to our internal control over financial reporting for such year. Our failure to comply with these requirements has resulted in us being in violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

•                   The restatement has resulted in a series of stockholder class action and derivative lawsuits against us. See “Risk Factors — We are currently a defendant in several stockholder class-action lawsuits and derivative actions.”

We are currently a defendant in several stockholder class-action lawsuits and derivative actions.

We and certain of our present and former officers and directors were named as defendants in nine purported class action complaints filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, and the Central District of California, Southern Division, alleging violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. In August 2004, four complaints were consolidated in the Middle District of Florida under the caption Primavera Investors v. Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc., et al. , Case No. 8:04-CV-919-T-23EAJ. John Lee, Chris Cowley, Dwight Mamanteo, Scott Purcell and Mark Rabold were appointed co-lead plaintiffs (the “Lead Plaintiffs”), but Mr. Mamanteo later withdrew. In September 2004, the five complaints filed in the Central District of California were transferred to the Middle District of Florida for consolidation with the Primavera Investors action. The Lead Plaintiffs served their Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on January 12, 2005. The Amended Complaint alleges that the Prospectus issued in connection with our initial public offering in May 2002 contained material misrepresentations and omissions regarding our historical financial condition and regarding a personal stock transaction by our former chief executive officer. The Lead Plaintiffs further generally allege that during the proposed Class Period of May 21, 2002, through May 13, 2004, the defendants engaged in improper revenue recognition with respect to certain of our business transactions, failed to maintain adequate internal controls, and knowingly disclosed unrealistic but favorable information about market demand for and commercial viability of our products to artificially inflate the value of our stock. The Amended Complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages and other relief. We, along with other defendants, filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint in March 2005. The Motion to Dismiss was denied in December 2005, and the defendants served their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on December 16, 2005. The Lead Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification is presently due April 2006. We intend to vigorously defend against the class action. We cannot currently predict the impact or resolution of this litigation or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss, which could be material. The resolution of this lawsuit may harm our business and have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.

In addition to the above, certain of our present and former officers and directors, as well as the company as a nominal defendant, have been named in three shareholder derivative actions. Two shareholder derivative complaints were filed in California state court styled Brian Clair, Derivatively on Behalf of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. v. John Kang, et

23

al. , Case No. 04CC00551, and Joseph Durgin, Derivatively on Behalf of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. v. John Kang, et al. , Case No. 04CC00553, both commenced in the Superior Court of Orange County, California.  A third shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, styled Robert Story v. John Kang, et al. , Case No. 8:04-CV-1587-T-23TBM. These shareholder derivative lawsuits allege that the defendants breached various fiduciary duties and otherwise violated state law based primarily upon the same underlying facts and circumstances as alleged in the federal shareholder class action. The plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory damages, restitution and disgorgement of profits, equitable and/or injunctive relief as permitted by law and other relief.

The two shareholder derivative complaints in California state court have been consolidated. We, along with other defendants, have thrice succeeded in having the Plaintiffs’ complaints dismissed for their failure to adequately plead demand futility. Most recently, on September 15, 2005, we, along with other defendants, filed a demurrer to the Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Second Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint dated August 16, 2005. In hearings on October 19, 2005, and January 20, 2006, the presiding judge sustained the demurrer, dismissing the second amended complaint but giving the plaintiffs until February 3, 2006, within which to serve a third amended complaint. The plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Third Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on February 3, 2006. We anticipate filing a demurer, seeking dismissal of the third amended complaint.

In the Florida derivative action, the Plaintiff filed a First Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on November 22, 2004. We, along with other defendants, filed a Motion to Dismiss in December 2004, to which the Plaintiff responded in opposition in February 2005. On January 20, 2006, the presiding judge granted our Motion to Dismiss, dismissing the complaint based upon the plaintiff’s failure to adequately plead futility. On February 17, 2006, the plaintiff filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court’s Order granting the Motion to Dismiss. We intend to vigorously defend against the derivative actions. We cannot currently predict the impact or resolution of this litigation or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss, which could be material. The resolution of this lawsuit may harm our business and have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.

Evolving regulation of corporate governance and public disclosure may result in additional expenses and continuing uncertainty.

Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and new SEC regulations, are creating uncertainty for public companies. As a result of these new rules and the size and limited resources of our company, we will incur additional costs associated with our public company reporting requirements, and we may not be able to comply with some of these new rules. For example, we have not been able to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for our 2005 and 2004 fiscal years. In addition, these new rules could make it more difficult or more costly for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and this could make it difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors.

We are presently evaluating and monitoring developments with respect to new and proposed rules and cannot predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs. These new or changed laws, regulations, and standards are subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices.

We are committed to maintaining high standards of corporate governance and public disclosure. As a result, we intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations, and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If our efforts to comply with new or changed laws, regulations, and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and we may be harmed.

The time and cost associated with complying with government regulations to which we could become subject could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Some of the applications that we have identified or may identify in the future may be subject to government regulations. For example, any medical devices such as precision ophthalmic instruments and orthopedic devices made from our alloys likely will be subject to extensive government regulation in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration, or FDA. Any medical device manufacturers to whom we sell Liquidmetal alloy products may need to comply with FDA requirements, including premarket approval or clearance under Section 510(k) of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act before

24

marketing in the United States Liquidmetal alloy medical device products. These medical device manufacturers may be required to obtain similar approvals before marketing these medical devices in foreign countries. Any medical device manufacturers with which we jointly develop and sell medical device products may not provide significant assistance to us in obtaining required regulatory approvals. The process of obtaining and maintaining required FDA and foreign regulatory approvals could be lengthy, expensive, and uncertain. Additionally, regulatory agencies can delay or prevent product introductions. The failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in substantial fines, civil and criminal penalties, stop sale orders, loss or denial of approvals, recalls of products, and product seizures.

In addition, the processing of beryllium, a minor constituent element of some of our alloys, can result in the release of beryllium into the workplace and the environment and in the creation of beryllium oxide as a by-product. Beryllium is classified as a hazardous air pollutant, a toxic substance, a hazardous substance, and a probable human carcinogen under environmental, safety, and health laws, and various acute and chronic health effects may result from exposure to beryllium. We are required to comply with certain regulatory requirements and to obtain a permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or other government agencies to process beryllium. Our failure to comply with present or future governmental regulations related to the processing of beryllium could result in suspension of manufacturing operations and substantial fines or criminal penalties.

To the extent that our products have the potential for dual use, such as military and non-military applications, they may be subject to import and export restrictions of the U.S. government, as well as other countries. The process of obtaining any required U.S. or foreign licenses or approvals could be time-consuming, costly, and uncertain. Failure to comply with import and export regulatory requirements can lead to substantial fines, civil and criminal penalties, and the loss of government contracting and export privileges.

The existence of minority stockholders in our Liquidmetal Golf subsidiary creates potential for conflicts of interest.

We directly own 79% of the outstanding capital stock of Liquidmetal Golf, our subsidiary that has the exclusive right to commercialize out technology in the golf market. The remaining 21% of Liquidmetal Golf stock is owned by approximately 95 stockholders of record. As a result, conflicts of interest may develop between us and the minority stockholders of Liquidmetal Golf. To the extent that our officers and directors are also officers or directors of Liquidmetal Golf, matters may arise that place the fiduciary duties of these individuals in conflicting positions. John Kang, our Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer, is also director of Liquidmetal Golf. In addition, James Kang, Founder and Director, is also a director of Liquidmetal Golf.

Our stock price has experienced volatility and may continue to experience volatility.

During 2005, the highest bid price for our common stock was $2.85 per share, while the lowest bid price during that period was $0.64 per share. The trading price of our common stock could continue to fluctuate widely due to:

•                   quarter-to-quarter variations in results of operations;

•                   loss of a major customer;

•                   announcements of technological innovations by us or our potential competitors;

•                   changes in, or our failure to meet, the expectations of securities analysts;

•                   other events or factors that may be beyond our control.

In addition, the securities markets in general have experienced extreme price and trading volume volatility in the past. The trading prices of securities of many companies at our stage of growth have fluctuated broadly, often for reasons unrelated to the operating performance of the specific companies. These general market and industry factors may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. If our stock price is volatile, we could face securities class action litigation, which could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources and could cause our stock price to fall.

25

Our convertible notes and warrants contain anti-dilution provisions that, if triggered, could cause substantial dilution to our then-existing stockholders.

As of December 31, 2005, we had outstanding approximately $2.4 million in aggregate principal amount of July 2007 Notes with a conversion price of $1.00 per share and $9.9 million in aggregate principal amount of August 2007 Notes with a conversion price of $2.00 per share. We also had outstanding warrants to purchase up to 563,151 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $2.73 per share and warrants to purchase an aggregate of 3,777,715 shares at an exercise price of $2.00 per share. Each of these notes and warrants contain weighted-average anti-dilution provisions whereby, if we issue shares in the future for consideration below such conversion or exercise prices, then (with certain exceptions, including the issuance of stock options) the conversion price for our convertible notes would automatically be reduced (allowing the holders of the notes to receive additional shares of common stock upon conversion) and the exercise price of the warrants would automatically be reduced. Further, the warrants from our outstanding convertible Notes and the beneficial conversion features of our August 2007 Notes have been accounted for as derivatives under SFAS 133 “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” and EITF 00-19 “Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock.” If our available funds and cash generated from operations are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements in the future, then we may need to raise substantial additional funds in the future to support our working capital requirements and for other purposes. If shares of our common stock or securities convertible into or exercisable for our common stock are issued in consideration of such funds at an effective per share price lower than the conversion and exercise prices of our convertible notes and warrants, then these anti-dilution provisions would be triggered, thus possibly causing substantial dilution to our then-existing stockholders if the notes are converted or the warrants are exercised. Further, subsequent sales of the shares in the public market could depress the market price of our stock by creating an excess in supply of shares for sale.

We have never paid dividends on our common stock, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have paid no cash dividends on our common stock to date. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our businesses, and upon the completion of this offering, we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our capital stock for the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms of existing or any future debts may preclude us from paying dividends on our stock. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

Antitakeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and provisions of applicable corporate law could delay or prevent a change of control that you may favor.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws, and Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would be beneficial to our stockholders. These provisions could discourage potential takeover attempts and could adversely affect the market price of our shares. Because of these provisions, you might not be able to receive a premium on your investment. These provisions:

•                   authorize our board of directors, without stockholder approval, to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of “blank check” preferred stock that could be issued by our board of directors to increase the number of outstanding shares and prevent a takeover attempt;

•                   limit stockholders’ ability to call a special meeting of our stockholders;

•                   provide for a classified board of directors; and

•                   establish advance notice requirements to nominate directors for election to our board of directors or to propose matters that can be acted on by stockholders at stockholder meetings.

The provisions described above could delay or make more difficult transactions involving a change in control of us or our management.

26

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

By a letter dated January 5, 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission provided the following comments with respect to our Form l0-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 and Forms 10-Q for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2005, June 30, 2005 and September 30, 2005.

Form l0-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

General

1.                Please comply with the following comments in each of your Forms 10-Q for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2005, June 30, 2005 and September 30, 2005:

Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005

Item 4. Controls and Procedures. page 34

8.                We note that the conclusion of your certifying officers in the third paragraph refers to the first quarter of 2005. Your certifying officers must assess the effectiveness of your disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by the report in which the conclusion is stated. Please revise accordingly. See Item 307 of Regulation S-K.

9.                We note the disclosure under the heading “Changes In Internal Controls” on page 36. Please disclose in reasonable detail the changes that were made to your internal control over financial reporting.

As of the filing of this Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, the Company addressed the foregoing comments in Amendment No. 2 to the Form l0-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 and Forms 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2005, June 30, 2005 and September 30, 2005, all of which were filed on March 16, 2006.

possible loss, which could be material. The resolution of this lawsuit may harm our business and have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.

In addition to the above, certain of our present and former officers and directors, as well as the company as a nominal defendant, have been named in three shareholder derivative actions. Two shareholder derivative complaints were filed in California state court styled Brian Clair, Derivatively on Behalf of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. v. John Kang, et al. , Case No. 04CC00551, and Joseph Durgin, Derivatively on Behalf of Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. v. John Kang, et al. , Case No. 04CC00553, both commenced in the Superior Court of Orange County, California.   A third shareholder derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, styled Robert Story v. John Kang, et al. , Case No. 8:04-CV-1587-T-23TBM. These shareholder derivative lawsuits allege that the defendants breached various fiduciary duties and otherwise violated state law based primarily upon the same underlying facts and circumstances as alleged in the federal shareholder class action. The plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory damages, restitution and disgorgement of profits, equitable and/or injunctive relief as permitted by law and other relief.

The two shareholder derivative complaints in California state court have been consolidated. We, along with other defendants, have thrice succeeded in having the Plaintiffs’ complaints dismissed for their failure to adequately plead demand futility.  Most recently, on September 15, 2005, we, along with other defendants, filed a demurrer to the Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Second Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint dated August 16, 2005.  In hearings on October 19, 2005, and January 20, 2006, the presiding judge sustained the demurrer, dismissing the second amended complaint but giving the plaintiffs until February 3, 2006, within which to serve a third amended complaint.  The plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Third Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on February 3, 2006. We anticipate filing a demurer, seeking dismissal of the third amended complaint.

In the Florida derivative action, the Plaintiff filed a First Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint on November 22, 2004.  We, along with other defendants, filed a Motion to Dismiss in December 2004, to which the Plaintiff responded in opposition in February 2005.  On January 20, 2006, the presiding judge granted our Motion to Dismiss, dismissing the complaint based upon the plaintiff’s failure to adequately plead futility.  On February 17, 2006, the plaintiff filed its Notice of Appeal of the Court’s Order granting the Motion to Dismiss.  We intend to vigorously defend against the derivative actions. We cannot currently predict the impact or resolution of this litigation or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss, which could be material. The resolution of this lawsuit may harm our business and have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.