REMINDER: Our user survey closes TODAY, please submit your responses 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.
And the complete opposite of my luck as well. I don’t think I will get £10,000,000 from Nano.!
And if you add together Samsung, Merck and STmicro perhaps £5 per share is not impossible given a little time even if it's a bit of a stretch. It would require everything to go right - the exact opposie to Nanoco's usual "luck"!
A £2.50--3 share price would require around £50m a year income, based on the average 13-15 times earnings which may have been realised with a sale of dots to Samsung, had they done the honourable thing.
Fingers crossed a deal is reached or the courts see it our way if Samsung want to play it the hard way. I think significant revenue from IR sensors is at least 18 months to two years away, and that's assuming it makes it through to commercialisation and in the meantime I estimate Nanoco have to find a spare couple of million to plug the gap between now August 2021. As pointed out in the interims, the cash situation would have been even more urgent but for the pandemic.
I can guarantee you that I am not a “bot” that’s for sure. I wasn’t predicting £4.48... I was just saying what a Genedrive increase would do to Nanos share price.
First £1, then £3, now botbot hinting at £4.48. Why not make it a round £5? I doubt anyone here would object although I think we might just be running away with ourselves a "little". Either botbot IS a bot and we can't believe the 2m share holdong OR I think it is safe to say he is definitely in a league either on his own or at least with very few other PIs in it.
ddubya. we can only wish and dream. Of course, there are several stocks that has gone through the roof, and I am sure that Nano will be one of them, hopefully sooner rather than later.! A Genedrive jump would be appreciated at 2,444%, that would only make Nano £4.48..! With the nanoparticles being used for cancer, they may have discovered that the CFQD's can be zapped at people, discover coronavirus and kill it, without harming the person.....of course, that may sound a bit far fetched, but with todays technology, who truly knows.!. Safe weekend everyone.
Very important to satisfy Mrs botbot. Pretty sure you must be PI Premier League in terms of holdings bot, unless a few others put claim to more than 2m?
I and I am sure others will join you both on a cruise if we reach £3.
ddubya. I didn't realise that I had a league :-)..............Am I winning.?... Wife told me that we need some money.!. Unsure why, considering we still can't go anywhere, and we already have TEN cruises booked for next year as we have had to bump 6 from this year.!......but, am hoping that we have bump here soon enough, so I can spin back down to 1m. I mean, who the hell needs £6m with a £3 settlement/buy-out share price....£3m will still be enough, i hope, even for my Wife.!
That second sentence should read "I have a large holding here, although not quite in the botbot league" I need to stop using a Fire tablet to post as spell check seems to have a mind of its own.
Good morning Nige. You have said before that I have a pessimistic outlook but I don't think that an accurate assessment of my position. I have a large holding here, although not quite in the horn of league. I consider my position realistic, whilst also remaining optimistic NANO still has some time to turn things round.
There is little doubt that IR sensors are set to become much more commonplace and NANO can and should be able to do good business in a growing market, so it's future should be assured in some shape or form. However, NANO is close to hibernation and either needs to generate new income streams now, or raise cash well ahead of Q2020 to keep the status quo.
There is absolutely no certainty that Samsung will settle or buy NANO. There has been sample opportunity for them to do so already any they have chosen not to. It will cost Samsung a fortune only if NANO has TP legal funding (I believe it is available) and wins the case on a profit settlement basis. Settlement on the license value would be much more modest but still big numbers - could be around £200 to £400m.
In my view Samsung will not settle for as long as there is an outside chance that NANO is unable or unwilling to litigate or goes under, at which point it would make a decision offer for the IP it has alleged!y stolen. I don't see that happening because LO has remained committed and sees value (primarily for itself) but that does not mean our holdings as PI are safe. We have been massively diluted in the past 10 years and if new income is not delivered in the next 2-3 months, further dilution will be both inevitable and large. Although we all hope for the best it makes sense to keep these very real risks in mind, so I do try to present what I believe is a balanced view for others to consider and for their own opinion and look for the same in the comments of others.
Hi ddubya
It may not be surprising that you seem to have a pessimistic point of view about nano given their History. New finances are hardly necessary when ME already said OK til next year, cos Samsung settlement will be before that, and that is besides Loam and the finance Company for the Court case who won't let them go bust.
Samsung will either take over nano or settle out of court, otherwise it will cost them a fortune. What would you do if you were Samsung (besides Huwawei contract)?
BoL
As you suggest, new income stream is essential to be a going concern without qualification next year Nanonano. Orders from Merck, ST Micro, Apple or anywhere would be welcome but any news that exists would have been better communicated ahead of Merck contract expiry. This is a very NANO way of doing things, and not to my liking, but I have hope the recent rise is an indicator something may be close. Fingers crossed as the alternative is unattractive.
As I see it, Nanoco have about another month or thereabouts to ink a deal or find some alternative finance to be signed off for the next financial year in their present form.
If the Dow factory, adjacent to Samsung’s, has been making CFQD for Samsung all these years then, we can expect further litigation against Dow, when the Samsung litigation is concluded. I do wonder what has been happening there, e.g. has it been mothballed or dismantled?
ME has regularly over promised and under delivered but in fairness, he has not been dealt a fair hand. NANO claims Samsung (at least) has been guilty of IP theft and effectively working to cull it. Conspiracy theory perhaps but none of us is naive enough to believe such things never happen. If NANO can stay solvent and arrange litigation finance, I think we shall get there, although it could be a long journey.
Not sure about vapour ware. The promised gaming monitors hit the market, only with someone else's dots in them.
Silicon Valley invented vaporware. Is it possible that Nanoco invented the 'vapor-customer'? I researched thoroughly, but found nothing. Nevertheless, I am certain that Michael Honest Abe Edelman must have proactively informed us in a timely manner that any hope of Samsung revenue had disappeared. Moreover, mentions of Samsung in annual reports every year must have been accidental, as were the 14 TV manufacturers prospects actively evaluating Nanoco CFQDs for many years.
Saddest of all was ME's failure to give all of those starved Nanoco and DOW sales people a proper burial. The silver lining is that Samsung seems to have really liked the product, and the DOW plant makes an interesting mausoleum. Apropos, I wonder if this plant is also being used to make Samsung dots.
The mystery of Samsung is no longer a mystery. However we still don't know why the other OEM's have not used Nanoco's product like AUO and Innlolux, having used them on prototypes. The Chinese seem happy to flood the market with cheaper cad based products, which was predicted by Nanoco in lieu of a ban on cadmium in display. Perhaps this may shift somewhat if the Chinese OEM's will be supplying Samsung with QLED LCD screens.
5 years ago...
""We are delighted that demand for Nanoco's cadmium-free quantum dots is at a point where Dow will begin construction of a large-scale manufacturing plant in South Korea based on our novel manufacturing process," said group chief executive Michael Edelman.
Semiconductor crystals such as cadmium-free quantum dots can be used in solar cells, biological imaging and in the production of display screens such LED TVs.
Analysts said Nanoco was on the verge of securing a major growth in revenue within the next three years.
"We believe Nanoco is today on the threshold of major growth in its revenues, earnings and cash flows," Liberum analysts Eoin Lambe and Janardan Menon said in a note.
"We currently forecast revenues to rise from £5m in the 2015 financial year to £51m by the financial year 2017." "
That revenue seemed to somehow end up with someone else in South Korea, as if by magic?
Past experience means I can't be anything other than circumspect when it comes to ME's forward looking statements.
ME seemed to be inferring a new relationship from a more “active” Merck, so you never know Basscadet, it could be more exciting and bigger than the previous contract? Let’s hope so.
Ah okay. Let's hope for both. Merck might provide some icing on that cake but not much. Any deal would be less than was in place before by definition I think.
Wasn't referring to STmicro deal, but on the last update they mentioned possible near term display revenue. We've had that before so I don't take it as gospel. Display revenue would liekly come via Taiwanese display OEM's e.g. AUO. AFAIK the relationship is still relevant there even though they've been using Nanosys dots/film.
Nanonana. The RNS on the relationship with STMicroelectronics said it was for work on infrared sensing. Not sure how that would feed into mini led screens. But delighted if it did.
The factory put together for Apple and now available for use by STMicro produces nano materials not QDs though Nanonano. Could we be seeing a mass market product out there using NANO tech at last?
I don't think there is a link between the latest STmicro news and nanoco, but would be happy to be proved wrong.
I think more likey is the news that's been reported quite a lot in recent weeks about Apple using mini LED screens in some of their next ipads and Macbooks. I think they may well be using QD's to get the best out of them, although that may not be the case, but if so, they will want quite a lot of screens, and they'll want the best performing cadmium free dots.