Episode #54: Scaling Metal 3D Printing for Reshoring: Seurat Technologies’ Next-Gen Additive Manufacturing with James DeMuth
This episode of U.S. Manufacturing Today features James DeMuth, CEO and co-founder of Seurat Technologies, discussing why reshoring at scale requires new manufacturing methods beyond traditional casting and machining. DeMuth explains how his work at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on fusion power revealed a need for alloys and complex geometries suited to 3D printing, but limited by slow laser powder-bed fusion; Seurat’s approach uses large-area projection with high-resolution patterning to increase throughput dramatically while maintaining quality. He contrasts major metal additive methods (laser powder-bed fusion, directed energy deposition, and binder jetting) and argues Seurat can deliver speed, quality, and lower cost while reducing waste and post-processing. The conversation also covers digital inventory, localized production, national security implications amid China’s subsidized manufacturing, the role of policy plus technology leadership, Seurat’s new production system, rapid material changeover via cartridge architecture, and where to learn more about the company.
Links
- James on LinkedIn
- Seurat Technologies
- Veryable Is Revitalizing U.S. Manufacturing
- Sign Up on the Veryable Platform
Timestamps
- 00:00 Manufacturing Reshoring Stakes
- 01:27 James Demuth Origins
- 01:37 Fusion Challenge Sparks Breakthrough
- 03:07 Printing Press For Metal
- 05:35 Why Casting Falls Short
- 08:25 Metal Additive Landscape
- 11:32 Seurat Secret Sauce
- 14:23 National Security And Policy
- 19:35 Factories Of The Future
- 23:10 Advice For Manufacturers
- 26:48 What Comes Next For Seurat
- 27:57 Wrap Up And Resources
Episode Transcript
Matt Horine: [00:00:00] Welcome to US Manufacturing Today, the podcast powered by Veryable, where we talk with the leaders, innovators, and change makers, shaping the future of American industry, along with providing regular updates on the state of manufacturing, the changing landscape policies and more.
There's a growing realization across the country that manufacturing isn't just an economics issue, it's a strategic one, and supply chain fragility, geopolitical competition and the need for resilience have all pushed manufacturing back into the national spotlight. Reshoring production at scale isn't just.
About policy. It requires fundamentally new ways of making things. Today's guest is building exactly that. James Demuth is the CEO and co-founder of Seurat Technologies, a company pioneering next generation metal additive manufacturing, designed to scale production in ways traditional casting and machining cannot, with more than 140 patents.
And a background at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, James sits at the intersection of advanced science and real world manufacturing execution. His work has the potential to reshape how [00:01:00] products are designed produced and sourced. With major implications for cost, sustainability, and national security.
Today we're going to talk about what it actually takes to Reshore Manufacturing in 2026, how METAL 3D printing is evolving from prototype to production, and why this technology could fundamentally change the industrial landscape. James, welcome to US manufacturing today.
James DeMuth: Matt. Thank you for having me.
Matt Horine: We are excited to have you on because this is a very interesting topic and something our audience would love to learn more about.
But would love to start with your background and your time at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and what initially drew you to advanced manufacturing and material science.
James DeMuth: Yeah. I was at Livermore for a little over six years, initially there to work on what's called the LIFE Program. So at Livermore they've got this facility called the National Ignition Facility or the NF, which essentially is NNSA, funded for nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship.
And they fire shots roughly once a day to do research and development. We were working on a program that said, that's nice. What if you were to instead fire it 12 [00:02:00] to 16 times a second and turn it into a power plant? And ultimately, how do we get green energy based off of sea water fusion power? You obviously, there's a lot you have to figure out to go from photons coming in to electrons, going to the grid, and do that at a positive energy generation ratio.
One of the main issues we found there was actually in the physical structures of the fusion chamber, you know, had to be made of a material that could withstand high temperature cyclic fatigue environment, as well as being bombarded by 14.1 AMIA neutrons, and also need to qualify for shallow lamb burial among variety of other restrictions.
And this meant that there was not a whole lot of alloys to choose from the one that we found that really worked best for us. That couldn't be, well, it couldn't be cast, but it could be 3D printed and 3D printing also gives you the ability to do next level geometries with complexity almost for free. So it seemed like a great fit, except for the fact that 3D printing was so slow.
It was gonna take over 200 years, two centuries to print one of these fusion chambers with the best of the industry technology. [00:03:00] And we said that's not. That doesn't work. Right. So how do you do this faster? How do you scale it up in the metal 3D printing process? The legacy traditional process is like you take a laser folks to a spot around a hundred microns in diameter, around the diameter of human hair, and you scan around a thin layer of metal powder, essentially micro welding that powder to the layer below.
And you. Scan as fast as you might. It's still a slow process. Now that's a single laser. You can go faster by adding more lasers, but adding more lasers gets you diminishing returns. And ultimately you go past, let's say, eight to 16 lasers and your unit economics are worse. And each laser produces diminishing returns if you would, as you keep adding them.
So then your option is add more machines if you wanna increase capacity, but that means they're in, you have to build your object in chunks, which also raises its own concerns. So we said, how do we scale this process? How do we do this better? And we eventually figured out, if you make the analogy, traditional laser powdered fusion is like writing a letter with a pen.
We figured out how to enable the printing press, right? How do [00:04:00] you do this in a massively parallel way? You can use a similar analogy of a serial process. It's like A CPU, right? On compute. How do you change that to the GP equivalent? And that's effectively what we've commercialized here at Seurat. Um, we.
Essentially what we developed at Livermore was essentially a large area projection. So instead of a hundred micron spot, we're projecting area 10,000 times larger, so about a size of a poached stamp or a centimeter on a slide, and then we project it down to the powder bed. But on its way down, we embed high resolution image inside of it with 10 micron pixels.
So you've got 10 times the resolution, 10,000 times larger, the area, and that allows you to have very high throughput in very fine resolution at the same time. You repeat this process 40 times per second. That's where we start. That's our first production system, and that allows you to get to some pretty compelling throughput rates and all while maintaining resolution, quality, and also unlocking this next level of cost.
It was really that capability, this architecture we're on. It's got [00:05:00] incredible scalability as well. So much so that when we run the math, it allows you to say, all right, this 200 year endeavor to print a fusion chamber, we get that into less than a week. And that's the kind of scale that we're talking about as we proceed down our roadmap through, through our machine development deployments.
Matt Horine: Incredible to think about it in terms of that timeline compression and that level of scale. Turning deep science into real manufacturing capability and capacity. I is the founding vision behind your company and taking a step back and looking at what it actually takes in this environment and this reshored environment and where we're looking at building and making things.
Again, there's a lot of discussion around reshoring, but from your perspective, what does it actually take to bring that kind of production back? And to double down on that, why haven't traditional methods like casting and machining been enough to fully reshore at scale?
James DeMuth: Casting means a lot of tooling.
Machining needs, tooling too, right? Fixtures and so forth. We see ourselves as competing with, let's say, machining, preforms, as well as casting, and [00:06:00] eventually some forming technologies or forges, right? The machining world we see as complimentary and on the whole part, which is why I spec specify machining preforms.
We see we've got an ability here to print those preforms more cost effectively than they can be roughed out from or hogged out from a block. Not only that, there's a lot less waste material, which is emissions aspect, which we can get into later. The whole process of generating tooling. Greatly extends timeline.
Now casting, you get to some incredible costs, but if you're gonna run a large volume casting, so castings get cheap as you go to high volume, you need to have robust tooling, which takes a lot of development if you want to have that last through your high volume production run. And that takes time. And so you're talking about, Hey, I want go to production with this.
It could be six months, it could be a year to actually get that production line built, operational, and get your parts out. Then because you spent all this money investing it, you make a lot of it and you made a lot of parts. You've made them all in one [00:07:00] location. But that's not where they're gonna be used.
They're gonna be used around the world potentially. And so that means that they need to then be distributed around the world and then stored. 'cause you've made, let's say, 10 years worth of stock. You didn't just make what you needed because it was so much effort to put it in place. You, you need to make it worth your while.
Contrast this with the vision of additive. Additive at scale can now start to talk about we're gonna make those parts where they're needed. When they're needed. You've got digital inventory for those parts, digital warehouse, and when you're ready, you have it made locally and you reduce warehousing costs.
You reduce distribution costs, and you've got an incredible flexibility to say what you need. And now this, I'd say the whole additive isn't that large scale. And so the high volume aspect of. Castings we're not able, additive is not be able to compete with that. So a castings and nutritional manufacturing technologies have their hands tied behind their back.
They've got a lot of restrictions on how they can make parts, and it's slow, right? This is the whole classical hardware is hard. It takes a lot of money and it takes a lot of time [00:08:00] to make it. Added as the opportunity to digitize manufacturing and make hardware behave more like software. The additive approach is what enables that.
Matt Horine: Now that makes a lot of sense, and from two perspectives there, the timeline compression and the ability to scale quickly without the traditional. Concerns around where you're making and storing things or some of the regulatory environment that that holds, that back really clarifies the picture. For listeners who may not be deeply familiar with 3D printing, how is RA's approach to metal or to metal additive manufacturing different from a traditional 3D printer?
Like how does the, where's the jump from what somebody may think of as commercially available 3D printer, or they've been doing this for a couple of years? What's the main jump for, for your company?
James DeMuth: At a high level, the fundamental difference here is about scale. It's about the ability to increase the throughput of your process at the right economics while maintaining quality metal additive.
Today, there's three main types of it, right? You got your laser pad infusion, which is done in rockets and done [00:09:00] in medical implants. It's done in really high end applications. 'cause it's expensive and it's slow, but it can deliver high quality points. And those are really the three main factors that you need to address when you're talking about additive.
Competing with conventional manufacturing, right? You need to be. Fast. You need to have high quality and need to be low cost. If you don't do all three of those things together, you're not competitive today. Additive is doing at most, one or two of those things, but never all three, and that's the problem, right?
So I just described laser powered fusion. It's high quality, but it's expensive and slow, right? And then you've got stuff like directed energy deposition. It's basically a welder mounts an A six axis robot. Great for repair of parts, right? It's really low resolution. Your well pool might be the size of your thumb.
It can print a lot of material really fast, so it's fast, it's cheap, but low quality, it requires extensive post-processing to get to that final shape. And metallurgy is not necessarily larger melt pools, larger geometries, that that can lead to different qualities of melt pool, especially if it's uncontrolled.
Which they're just, they just [00:10:00] got a big honk and beam, or they've got a big electric arc and it's just welding it all at once. That's a relatively uncontrolled process. And then you've got binder jetting. Binder jetting has essentially, you're squirting glue or you've got plastic coated particles, and then you're either melting the particles and fusing it together, or you're somehow fusing, gluing those particles together.
Then you have to do a secondary step where you put into a furnace, and then a packed bed of particles is like 60 to 80% dense.
Noah Labhart: Right.
James DeMuth: All uniform spheres of a single distribution, 60%. So you're talking like 20 to 40% shrinkage of your part, and that is random. You got a stochastic distribution of particles and their sizes.
No matter how good you are, it's never perfect, and you don't know exactly whether they're never in a perfect lattice, right? And so there is randomness in your shrinkage, which just kills your reliability. And now you need to measure every single one of your parts. Because one out of a hundred, even one outta a thousand, like you look at automotive, you need one out of 10 million, right?
That's the failure rate they need. Measuring that is [00:11:00] expensive. You need to have a process that's good and reliable and jetting. Fundamentally has a problem with getting there, right? So it's also got aspects of, there's large minimum feature sizes. They can't do things that are too small, but they can't do really thick walls 'cause you can't get the binder out of them.
And so there's a lot of constraints. You also never are getting the right metallurgy because you're centering never fully melting, right? So you can't reset. You can only grow grains, you can never make them smaller through heat treatment and so forth. So binder jetting is cheap, fast, low quality. So those are the three main ones.
What we did is we said, all right, let's start with the high quality process, laser pad infusion, and how do we scale this in a massive way? Step one, we build our own laser, right? Lawrence Silver National Laboratory, AKA Lasers laser, but nothing but lasers. We have a fundamental understanding of how you build lasers.
We also don't use the same type of laser either, right? Everyone else is using a fiber laser. You, we use what's called a diode pump, salt state laser. It's pulsed, so there's a really high burst of energy and a short pulse, but we had to modify the canonical [00:12:00] diode pump, state laser or dipole doesn't quite deliver the right pulse dynamics, so we had to modify them.
So we had to build our own system to do that. So we sculpt our pulse over time and then we pattern it with a high resolution image that gives us sculpting ability over space. And so we, we do have a very large Mel pool, but we can control how that Mel pool behaves by patterning dynamically inside of it during a pulse.
And so we've got this incredible ability to control on a per pixel level what the time temperature curves of the metal are doing, which is never been possible before. The time temperature, heating and cooling rates on metal are, is the Accenture core of what makes quality. That little control is how you get to incredible quality, whether it's controlling the grain structure, the grain orientation, or training the solidification rates spatially without slowing down.
That's the key thing. Oh, by the way, did I mentioned the laser scale really incredibly. It's 10 x the throughput for three x the cost. [00:13:00] There's a huge opportunity here to go, let's say if we're at like 200, 300 a kilo today to 20 to $30 a kilo as we go through subsequent generations of machines, and that's the volume, the price points for high volume castings.
That's a multi-trillion dollar industry right there for automotive. And it's about how do you scale? I'd say. Laser power fusion, they don't have a path, right? They can have more lasers, they can defocus them, which means they have low resolution. We've got an ability to pattern our lasers, so that defines our resolution engine in an engineered way.
We design our own laser system, so design our own light valve. That's a patterning, design our own lasers that gives us power and the throughput. So you've got the access of throughput, you've got the access of quality, and it turns out for us and from pretty much everyone else, as you make the lasers bigger, they get more efficient and more effective, and you get better utilization of them.
So you get a lower cost. The problem for everyone else is you make the BA lasers bigger, you have a bigger spot size, you have lower quality, so they're trading off CapEx benefit for process. Process. Post-processing is often called the dirty little secretive additive, and they're pushing [00:14:00] towards more of that.
We've got an opportunity to reduce post-processing and take the CapEx advantages at the same time, so you get a win-win instead of a win lose trade off.
Matt Horine: Makes a lot of sense and a lot of really great takeaways there. More throughput, higher utilization, less waste, all of those things which are critical for manufacturing in general, but also in this, this drive for reshoring and reindustrialization that we're in.
Just taking a quick pivot in the show, I think we've spoken about manufacturing as a national security issue, born supply chain reliance. Can these. Technologies, one, help close gaps faster than traditional methods that we're seeing right now, or what's been the general discourse? And two, what role should policy and government or private industry play?
It's something that we've seen the debate play out in rebuilding the industrial base, but do you see some type of help from federal policy makers helping accelerate this
James DeMuth: at a high level? Right. We're talking about the ability to make any geometry in any material. That's an incredible capability and.
[00:15:00] Whether you're talking munitions, whether you're talking about defensive operations, you're talking about compute power and cooling it, right? There's the ability to do that is it's the ability to create, right? And that is central to us being successful as a country. And if we let others become experts in that faster than us, we're gonna fall behind, right?
China's investing. Hundreds of millions, if not billions, into deploying. Not new technology, but just massive amounts of legacy, traditional laser pad fusion and other additive technologies, right? They subsidize CapEx, they've got cheap labor. The west is never gonna compete on a cost basis with them using the same technology.
And so the where the part of this recent boom we're seeing in additive and manufacturing in general, is only enabled by the fact that the technologies. The industries that they're addressing have prohibited China to compete. So [00:16:00] defense, aerospace, that's where they're able to really shine. That's not, that's gonna last for a while, but that's a very small segment of the overall market.
And so if we double down and focus on that, China's gonna expand and dominate everywhere else and. The way you compete against that is twofold, right? One, China is working with an unlevel playing field, right? By subsidizing every, all this manufacturing, they're essentially making the cost of it plummet.
Now, they'll always be able to drive a lower cost than the westwell. That's just is how they work. The West is just not capable of keeping up with it, and we could, if there was the policy to do that, but there's just generally speaking, there is, has not been the political will the way we compete against as twofold.
So one policy. To essentially accelerate our own manufacturing stateside and two, have a better technology. Our selfish perspective is do both and we see that we've got a tech that can fundamentally compete with China at scale, no matter how [00:17:00] far they subsidize it, we can, we can scale our tech to be incredibly competitive and in such that, yeah, you can subsidize something so they're losing money, hand or fist.
If that's the case and that's what they need to do to compete with us by a lot. Sure. Let them have at it. That's fine. Obviously, zero is a non-competitive price point, right? How do you compete with zero, but you compete with zero by having the policy, by doing the tandem combination. Right. So that's the two main drivers that are going on.
I'd say that they are also working on trying to recreate what we're doing, right. There's several years behind, but they got papers out there on light valves and lasers, and they're trying to recreate it. They don't know how it's done. They're definitely barking up a lot of the wrong trees. I'm not gonna confirm or deny anything that they're doing because specifically because I don't wanna give them any guidance on where to go.
Once there's there, that's the thing is you can drive towards that target and you will get there faster than the whoever it was that forged that path initially because they were searching versus those a target and you're driving in that direction, but it forge ahead. The question just is, are you forging [00:18:00] on the right path or are you on a wild goose chase?
So. Our goal is to send them on wild goose chases by disseminating a lot of fear, uncertainty, and doubt into exactly what we're doing. There's all these different ways of doing it. Which one's the right one? It's buried in there somewhere, but we're not gonna tell you. But they're pouring a lot of money into it, so they're working on catching up.
And if they get to those capabilities faster than we do, we're gonna be in a world hurt. 'cause that's like saying, Hey, all of a sudden, who was the first to develop atomic weapons? Right? Now they've got a leg up on everyone else. Not saying this is like that, but nuclear is all about geometry. And guess what?
Additive is all about geometry. Geometry enables geometry enabled applications, whether it's lightweighting, it's more efficient, or it's just enabling fundamentally new technology that was not possible before. And a lot of these processes, especially in nuclear lasers, optics through non-linear. That means it's not like a gradual approach.
It's like you figure something out. It's a step function change. So not only are we enabling a step function change from a technology manufacturing, we've got the ability to enable step function changes for our customers in their [00:19:00] industries. By figuring out how to, working with them to enable their visions on how to do stuff, which are not possible today with conventional manufacturing.
Matt Horine: That's, I think a lot of the story on Reindustrialization is looking back at what happened over the last 30 years. It's a recurring theme on our show that started with basically labor arbitrage and some of those inputs that you talked about. I think that two focal lens that, that you're talking about, one.
You know, how do we do that from a policy standpoint? But two, just the technology arms race is so critical, and I think you summarized that really well. It's like ways to win, how do we win this arms race? So that makes a lot of sense. And I think what also is missing is we talk about a lot of the here and now.
If you were to look out ahead 5, 10, 15 years, how different will manufacturing look if technologies like this were widely adopted? I think we're probably in the very early phases of this, right? If you were looking out at the future of not just your company, but this technology in general, its applications, what's the ideal state for you?
James DeMuth: Yeah, I mean from, from our perspective, right? We are, we've been [00:20:00] doing a lot of development work on what, on what it is that we're commercializing, but we're also very new to the blog from a commercialization standpoint. Our first production system's literally just turned on a couple weeks ago. That's how new it is, right?
Which is incredibly exciting time for us, but it's also meaning that like we're just starting there and for better, for worse. We have a fundamentally different process from everyone else. So we don't get to build on the 26, 36 years of laser pad fusion recipe development that's gone on. We have to start from, uh, round zero, right, and build up from there.
I think there's a lot of work to do there. There's a lot that needs to happen to get across that finish line, but we're gonna see as this gets adopted, this just means rapid speed up in the ability to test something and go to mass high volume production. Right. So you figure out a new design to do something, and then in a, in the, on the order of weeks, you could be in producing millions of units, right?
That's the kind of level of scale up. So [00:21:00] you can talk about massive changes, like you have a new type of munitions, right? That you've figured out, right? You can go from figuring that out to being, having actual articles on the ground in a rapid timeframe. Now, for that, like from our perspective, like you need to have several machines deployed to be able to do that.
To have that capacity. Right? So for us there's what's the current install capacity? That's the flexibility you have rapidly. And then what's the future install capacity you do with future orders? One of the things that we've been focused on is how do you make a nimble manufacturing facility? So one of the, we've we're not just setting, you know, things apart on the laser side and optics and patterning and distribution of high quality light.
We're also focused on the materials and the changeover speeds. Right? So we're printing fi prints really, we're doing completing prints quickly. If you're doing a print in four hours, you can't spend four hours to reset your printer. That's not viable, right? That's a 50% duty cycle. That's awful. Right? And today's printers are not even that.
They're like 6, 8, 12, sometimes 24 or 48 hours to reset some of these [00:22:00] prints. If you're doing a print in four hours, that's totally non-viable. So like we've got a separate, what we call a cartridge architecture, which means that the powder is loaded, you're purged offline, you're relied, your spreader, you're all ready to go.
You finish a print, you take out that print, you put in a new one, you're back up and running within 15 minutes. It could be a different material for a different customer, for a different part, doesn't matter. Our goal is we're deploying factories. We wanna fill our funnel, right? Which means we need to be agile and nimble for how you slot in different applications and really utilize your tools and equipment and your resources.
But this also means that there's an opportunity to say, Hey, we work with different organizations that maybe they'll help fund a factory deployment. When they come a calling, we drop everything and do their parts to fill their stockpile, right? That they just depleted doing X, y, Z activity. So that nimbleness in manufacturing, uh, is also baked into what we're doing selfishly for our own purposes.
'cause we wanna make sure that we can utilize our systems to the fullest extent possible. My background's in energy systems, which is all about [00:23:00] efficiency. I, we have to use our equipment to the best of possible, otherwise it's gonna irk me.
Matt Horine: No, that's, I think the challenge for most manufacturers is finding that level of efficiency.
But you maybe take a whole new speed to that for sure. For listeners now who are just maybe getting exposed to this concept or like the factories of the future, how these are distributed in the future, or how we become more digital or more automated. What should they be doing today to prepare for that kind of future?
I caught a couple things there in the last answer, preparing for that rapid scale up. Preparing to be able to, you know, change parts more quickly and to have more flexibility and agility. But those are a lot of times, um, from my side, I give a lot of buzzwords like that. If you were talking to a manufacturer today that was looking to make this step level change, what advice would you give them to maybe start thinking about it?
James DeMuth: Yeah, I mean, there's. Obviously there's different people in different areas of different organizations that you work with at different times, right? And so you're always talking to a variety of folks. Manufacturing groups and supply chain groups are gonna look to say, all right, I need to make this part. I don't wanna change a geometry, I just wanna make this part.
I wanna make more of it. That's an easy, quick enabling [00:24:00] path. We can do that very effectively, no change needed. Then you've got the folks that are in RD that are trying to push the bounds of what's going on, and you've got crossover area where, hey. They're like, let's make this part again, but oh, you're a new manufacturing process.
So we technically need a new part number. And then they go, since we have a new part number and it takes us like six months to get a new part number entered into our system, we could maybe make a couple small tweaks to the design because now we can, and we can get better benefits because of that. And now you go down the slippery slope to not only designing yourself in, but you have.
Enable new capabilities. What you gotta watch out for is that can take time, right? So you wanna do things rapidly, but you also want to enable that customer to do more, right? And do more at a better price. There are, you can make a lot of analogies. I like the electricity GU analogy here, which is that the ability to make anything at relevant cost points, it is almost like electricity, right?
We know it's gonna be useful, but we don't know how. The problem is when [00:25:00] electricity was invented, no one knew what the GPU was, right? But electricity has enabled the GPU. There was no electricity. There'd be no GPU. We are at that sort of forefront. We're enabling new things to be made new capabilities, but what creativity, whether it's personal or AI or combination does with that is what's gonna become very exciting.
Right. We often give the water bug example, right? There's a water bug and nature inspired is like the way to do things, right? You've seen like the hyper trains in Japan, they were making like blast waves and they put in a kingfisher, you know, nose to effectively dissipate that. The water bug example is like there's a water bug that's got a little merry mesh around its body that is finally woven enough together that holds off the surface tension of water, and then you get oxygen diffusion and CO2 diffusion in and out of that bubble, and it has its own self-contained underwater breathing apparatus, right?
That's all geometry drift as if you scaled it up and you made this effectively like an underwater lung. Now you have enabled something that is larger to not need to get oxygen from outside or have some crazy expensive, it's a passive [00:26:00] system. And now you've enabled either people to be underwater indefinitely.
You've enabled subs to be underwater indefinitely, right? Or have you enabled underwater dwellings to be underwater indefinitely, at least from that mechanism, all because of a bug. What else is out there, right? And it's that creativity that's gonna unlock crazy stuff that we can't even dream of now. But we need to have the tools and that's what we're putting in place, is the tools to unlock that creativity so we can all take that next level step in making parts, making new capabilities, applications, even new fields of science and development and engineering.
That's what's exciting, right? So when you look about 10 to 15 years in the future, I can only hope that we're enabling that to be the case because of what we've been able on the manufacturing side.
Matt Horine: Yeah, absolutely. The groundwork is certainly being laid right now for something very exciting and to your point, something we may not even know of yet.
So that is a very compelling story about your company and it sounds like you just launched production and what's next for you guys in the next couple months here and as you go to market?
James DeMuth: We are [00:27:00] right now with our first production systems coming online. Our focus is on moving our massive backlog of customers through our funnel.
And ultimately our vision here is putting into place multi-year bookings for park production. And we got some of those in place, but let's, we gotta move them through the funnel and for that we need the funnel to be open, which. Just now opening up, which is exciting times.
Matt Horine: Absolutely. Where can our listeners go to find out more about you and more about Bra and what's next for you guys?
James DeMuth: Yeah. Start with Seurat.com or reach out to us at info@seurat.com. We're happy to field questions or also the big conference coming up Rapid. We've got some different posts on LinkedIn if you wanna check out what we're doing. There were different opportunities to, to learn more about what's going on at Seurat. Those are probably the quickest and easiest ways to go, and we're always looking for bright minded individuals and different capabilities to accelerate what we're doing.
Matt Horine: Excellent. Thank you very much for joining us today, James. I've learned a lot and obviously it's great for our audience because this is the future, and we are really excited to have you, so thanks a lot.
James DeMuth: Thank you, Matt. Glad to be here.
Matt Horine: What James and the team at Seurat are building represents a [00:28:00] glimpse into the future where advanced manufacturing enables not just efficiency, but resilience, sustainability, and strategic independence. As the US looks to re industrialize, innovations like this won't just be help. It'll be essential.
To stay ahead of the curve and to help plan your strategy, please check out our [00:26:00] website at www.veryableops.com and under the resources section titled Trump 2.0, where you can see the framework around upcoming policies and how it will impact you and your business. If you're on socials, give us a follow on LinkedIn, X, formerly Twitter, and Instagram. And if you're enjoying the podcast, please feel free to follow the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube, and leave us a rating and don't forget to subscribe. Thank you again for joining us and learning more about how you can make your way.