In a unique collaboration with Canada’s leading mining investment bank Red Cloud Securities, we bring you 4 amazing speakers. Canadian-listed Consolidated Uranium have 13 projects across 4 countries. Canadian-listed E3 lithium are developing lithium from brine in Canada. Sigma Lithium Corp are developing potentially the world’s 4th largest lithium mine in Brazil. And David Talbot, top mining analyst at Red Cloud talks us through the metal supercycles. Please register here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
NGR1616 is spot on. And I suggest people watch BT’s interview of early May on Edison’s webpage for first hand info.
At the bottom line this board should not get too wound up - main thing is that we have a good CEO at the helm and a good legal team.
The wise thing to do in my humble opinion is to sit back drink tea and watch this story unfold.
If it goes to plan a good junk of my mortgage will be history in autumn.
Tenner discussed only recently a negotiated settlement based on the life of the patents ie 2028 &2035 with fair value for the patents globally being the boards preferred outcome. The lawyers (Mintz) will definitely be making it clear that their intentions will be to pursue the European sales as suggested below and arguing this is speculation is being a little obtuse I’d say.
Well they haven’t articulated what further action they will take and until they do it remains conjecture.
We’ll see for sure soon enough.
It's neither 'conjecture' nor 'idle speculation' to suggest that Nanoco will take the case worldwide if Samsung try to string the process out. Nanoco have said they'll take more action, it is the obvious thing to do and it's also obvious that they won't be worried about an appeal against the PTAB since the outcome was never in doubt and since 47/0 could not be any more equivocal.
If it made commercial sense to find the current litigation it must make even more sense to fund more litigation in other jurisdictions now that the patents have been upheld in the USA. Nanoco should be able to get better litigation financing terms that reflect the reduced risks and successful relationship too.
I should not be surprised if Nanoco launch more actions against further parties. I suggest that anyone who has intimated they might supply CF Free QD's to the market in quantity will have already been warned by Mintz that they will be put on notice.
Since the legal arguments are now all documented and rehearsed I expect either a global settlement or more legal action in the coming weeks and months. I don't think they'll hang around until the Autumn hearing (but that is not to say that Samsung won't continue to act stubbornly in response).
I suspect the share price has been held lower by RG and his selling, and hopefully that is passed or will pass soon.
There’s also the fact that this is a jury trial not decided by a judge which holds all sorts of unknowns. Not always logical decisions from jurys. In our favour though is the human back story, along with the David and Goliath angle, as well as a bit of West versus East which believe it or not does still play a part with local jurys. If the first two are well articulated I believe it gives us even more of an advantage, an advantage which is far more important than if it were a judge alone presiding. IMO
the price is still below our expectations because the market likes certainty. the PTAB Board decided in favor of Nanoco. This is a battle. But Nanoco has not yet won the war. Hence the reluctance of investors. The next stop is the hearing on June 2nd. Then trial in fall. In between, I hope the market gets what it needs for a push. A commercial contract or possible settlement. Those are exactly the facts investors love to hear. Sales and profitable companies. And the sp will rocket!
a chance to "buy" lower
In my experience "negative" news is never baked in - everyone wants results and outcomes tomorrow - but this is exactly how to make money investing. I really don't see how the SP pre-trial, will be so low as it is now. There may be a chance to by lower, but if so, probably not all that much lower.
I would that the current price wholly discounts the possibility of a commercial contract landing in H2 2022, and that is fair enough in my eyes.
Interesting assessment Feeks, thanks.
Only thing I wonder is that surely a delay is baked in at these prices? That’s the only reason I can see for being where we are now, that and being a relatively obscure small cap in the eyes of the critical mass.
We are currently at around a 5p premium vs the pre PTAB high of 32p…and to my mind either that was overvalued or current price is undervalued…it can’t be both.
Agreed Matty boy
I don't think this idle speculation is adding much to the debate. Personally, I am a little surprised that the SP has settled around 35-37p mark, as I thought it would be 40-50p, but in my view that will be the floor come the time of the main trial hearing. For now, I suggest everyone takes a well-earned break during this small period of wait before things get interesting again!
My take on things FWIW:
1. Litigants will often be having conversations about whether they can reach agreement to settle so I expect this will be ongoing in the background. I expect the conversation is now around the sort of settlement figures Nanoco was originally asking from S due to the successful progress of this case so far - but probably even more now due to increased display sales and improved confidence in the case - we shall never know! S will need to up its offer if it wishes to avoid trial. N is holding all the cards right now, the question is what sort of offer it wants to hold out for...? No need to engage with S on this; it is for S to put forward an offer.
2. S will appeal PTAB
3. S will argue the trial should be delayed for PTAB appeal; N will argue the opposite and the trial will go ahead because the judge is in control of the docket and PTAB 47-0 indicates that waiting for an appeal is not in the interests of justice when the case is ready and waiting for trial.
4. Possible risk that the trial will be heard no in Q4 2022 but in Q1 2023, just to fit in with court and parties lawyer's diaries
Risks and Opportunities:
- News of a settlement could land at any time (but most likely not before 2 & 3)
- Risk of temporary SP drop on news of 2, 3 or 4, but if so, it's a massive buying opportunity IMO.
- Any news of commercial contracts win H2 2022 could create a massive upward revaluation. I don't hold out much hope for this just because new tech launches always seem to get delayed, but if it happens the whole ball-game improves for Nanoco shareholders and its directors, and this will help the litigation too.
- Regardless, IMO the SP will be appreciably higher by time a trial starts and that for those prepared to wait the current price offers good value in the same way it was when it was hovering around 10p at the inception of this legal case.
As suspected....no evidence at all, just conjecture.
We have you by the goolies.
If you don't proceed as we request, we'll tear them off root and branch and stuff them down your ugly mouths.
@NigWitty: Wrong approach - let Samsung approach us. After PTAB the pressure is on them not Nanoco.
The way I see it is that Samsung will find it very hard to win the court case so Nanoco can take a confident position. Once the court case goes our way Nanoco can apply even more pressure.
Sure, the evidence is
1. It as much as Tenner said - go back and listen
2. It is normal to apply maximum pressure in any litigation
3. The litigation funders will want to maximise their ROI and can now lever up with less risk than before
4. Unless the sides are already negotiating there's no reason not to put Samsung on notice of more action. I imagine the notice will read something like ...
Dear Samsung's Lawyers
Re Samsung v Nanoco in The Texas Court - Notice of Further Worldwide Proceedings
Without Prejudice Save as to Costs
Following the recent findings at PTAB the most likely outcome of our client's current claims against you is now clearer than ever. Therefore, our client invites your client to settle for X* amount in respect of all their claims and entitlements against them worldwide (the offer). Should your client choose not to accept this invitation in full before Y** date then further proceedings against them will be instituted in all relevant international jurisdictions without further notice.
We look forwards to your early confirmation that your client accepts the offer. For the avoidance of doubt should your client not accept the offer by Y date it will automatically lapse.
*X will be large
** Y will be soon
It will be a longer letter in reality but you'll get the gist.
“ Samsung are on a robust notice from Mintz that if they don’t settle before the next court deadline then worldwide proceedings will be issued”
Can you provide evidence for this statement?
I suggest that following the overwhelming PTAB outcome and Tenner’s subsequent remarks, Samsung are on a robust notice from Mintz that if they don’t settle before the next court deadline then worldwide proceedings will be issued. I expect that the litigation funder was lined up for this months ago.
Whilst commenting it isn’t normal for the litigation funder to interfere once they’ve agreed funding. Chris Bogart of Burford Capital, (who may be the funders) has been clear that they see things through and don’t review the funding case after it’s been agreed.
Samsung must realise they’re on the hook and being reeled in now. I don’t see how they can realistically hope to evade substantial damages eventually so rationally their best course would be to bargain for an early payment discount and heal future relations..
I think I had in the back of my mind that the third party funders would want to be a part of pursuit in different jurisdictions, but I may be getting carried away there haha.
You guys are right let’s get some organic cash flowing in, that would be fantastic news.
I totally understand you BeContrarian. In the long term. However, Nanoco needs cash in the short to medium term. Nanoco's board knows that too and they are working hard on it.
Of course, in the long term, the amount that Nanoco gets if it wins against Samsung or if it settles is enormous. But it will take time.
The market would appreciate a RNS to a first commercial contract within next weeks/months. Nanoco had bad luck the recent years. 2022 seems to be different. it started quite positive true? :-)
I’d hope that the board would wait until we have a bit of cash on hand, or at least until the share price recovers a bit if they’re thinking of a cash raise before pursuing any further legal action in other jurisdictions. If the sensor contracts go ahead as planned Nanoco should be comfortably solvent for the first time in its history.
I would be happy really happy to see and RNS updating us on a commercial contract. I think that will happen in time. But I’d be even happier If we had an RNS announcing a litigation update informing shareholders of their intent to pursue Samsung in Europe and other territories.
We’ve smashed them 47-0. Let’s go for the jugular here and force Samsung to the table. Let’s not give them the dither and delay option in the US by putting the heat on them everywhere else!
I don't think Samsung is afraid of losing face. The case is probably of little interest to consumers and it doesn't matter to business partners. Everyone in the industry knows that the big corporations steal the IP of small businesses. Most small businesses barely have the financial resources to fight back. Nanoco is an exception in this case. Because there is a third party funder who invests a lot of money to get a good return. They only do that if they are pretty sure that it will pay off. Risk is always there. No question. But nobody probably invests millions in order not to have a high probability of making money with it.
However, I am most curious about a commercial contract. I hope that Nanoco will publish information about this in the next few weeks. That would be good for the share price and also strengthen the basis for negotiations for a possible settlement, should that be the case.
As far as I can determine, Samsung's current assets on 3/31/22 was $183,572,000,000. I would be very pleased if Nanoco's award amount required installment payments.
Warning to Nanoco management:
If Nanoco agrees to an NDA that limits key disclosures, insider trading laws would bar knowledgeable employees from trading Nanoco shares.
On the Galaxy G4 case, it was only for a small amount “ Samsung agreed Thursday to pay $2.8 million to settle a California lawsuit alleging it misled consumers by rigging the Galaxy S4 to run faster in presale speed ...”.
Can’t get any more details (paywall)