We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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. 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.
I'm in tune with that thinking Screenlearner. I did think it was time for Mike to consider his position when Apple terminated (and said as much) but ironically, having a CEO based in the States has probably greatly assisted development of the case against Samsung and it has been quite an achievement to take the lawsuit cost off balance sheet. It has been necessary to convince top lawyers that the case is sound and it is ready for the main test.
Despite the wait, my sense is also that we are on the cusp, so no advantage to a change at the top now. IR sensors will be the main source of income near term, Display might follow and the lawsuit is the cherry on the cake.
I seem to be on a different 'side' to many here as I am willing to give ME the benefit of the doubt for a little while longer as I think he was probably (allegedly) right royally 'played', not just by a certain company disliked by us all, but possibly by a number of companies working in cahoots who didn't want Nanoco to succeed. Now however I suspect, despite all this, we are on the cusp of the company being a central player in a massive new 'industry'. This is also the reason I think Nanoco IP and its 'newer' products could make all still invested here a tidy sum over the next few years even in we do not get a massive payout from Samsung. We just need one or more of the obvious potential contracts to be firmed up and to deliver Nanoco's first concrete success. Then the sky's the limit , I hope (DYOR).
I would have thought the IR contracts with Apple alone counted as significant development and progress, both in terms of products, revenue and deal-making. I don't think ME can be blamed entirely for Nanoco's relentless disappointments. many of them are largely unexplained, imo, but I do think he has failed enough times to justify being replaced.
You see what happens when I don’t send a moaning message. All day it’s up and then last second it’s dropped.
85% of QD dsplays sold use Nanoco technology. They just haven't received a penny for it, because they were ripped off by Samsung , allegedly.
Mike has always been a useless CEO. Failed in display.To date a sports massage vibrator and a few garden lights is his list of accomplishments. Every fund raise is so he has a salary. Any one remember q1 2017/2018 first commercial display I forget which year as it is irrelevant now. Watch nanoco YouTube videos hilarious that he has not achieved anything substantial despite what he says. Crook
I agree with BeingTheBanker's opinion of the current situation. There has been no significant progress or development within the company since I have been invested, although I remain hopeful of a significant profit when the patent infringement legal action with Samsung is resolved.
Perhaps it is better to set my NANO shares to one side, and concentrate on my other investments for the time being. They, at least, show signs of "life" and there is constantly emerging information, which suggests that these companies are progressing with their development. New products are in the pipeline, significant new contracts are being won and share prices are rising. With Nanoco there is none of this. My investment here appears to hinge on the eventual settlement of the aforementioned court action, which could be tomorrow or in several years time?
Like many other Nanoco investors, I realise that I should have sold in mid February @ 30.05p, when the opportunity was present, albeit for a short time. A subsequent buyback following the share price collapse, mainly due the Chinese virus, would have realised another subsequent profit when the share price eventually rose to the present level. The opportunity presented itself to make a significant profit. Unfortunately, I was so blind sighted by the "bid-process hype" at the time that my usual predatory investor instincts didn't kick in. There was a genuine opportunity here, which I failed to act upon. However, I remain optimistic that there are good profits ahead in the indeterminate future. Regards and best wishes to all Nanoco investors. I continue to read your comments, and am grateful for the significant information that is constantly offered on this board.