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.
Had it not been for the Apple contract, which although didn't make it through to production did provide the company with some reasonably substantial income, we'd have been out of cash probably 12 months ago.
The Covid 19 crisis, whilst perhaps interfering with a potential sale of the company did permit a reduction of staff costs.
A potential ban on Samsung QLED sales in the US would almost certainly broker an agreeable deal, but my feeling is that is unlikely to happen.
RG did a timely reduction. He’s good. I’m a bit regretting putting in 1k this evening, but it’s this first time I’ve used PrimaryBid (been registered for 6 weeks) so it’s a good test on a share that I know. I’ll see if/how HL will bed into my ISA. PrimaryBid can’t put into an ISA as they would not know what allowance you have left and the amount would depend on number of shares and price, so I do understand the limitations of using them.
Agree with all of that Nanonano. In my view, Samsung stitched NANO up like a kipper and was not counting on Apple releasing NANO funding its share of the Runcorn development or Covid 19, which has provided more breathing space.
I suspect Samsung may have already made a derisory offer to settle but NANO wants a sensible settlement. Like you, I don't see it being gifted and most likely it will go to Court. Our TP funders now have substantial influence and will want to derive maximum value, so expect the long haul and if an acceptable settlement is made earlier that's a bonus.
@morbox is he good or was he informed beforehand???
Re primarybid, apparently you use a 'bed and isa', which you'll have to ask HL you do once the investment is in your regular HL account. This bed and isa sells the shares in the regular account and buys them in the isa account at the same time so prices don't change.
I asked PB about fidelity and apparently they are working with fidelity to have them listed on their website soon
I think anyone investing or extending their investment into Nanoco need to bear in mind that we are now over a year past the cancellation of the Apple contract, and in that time , only one additional commercialisation agreement has been inked, and any revenue from that is still over a year away if it materialises at all. Products can get cancelled at a late stage as we discovered all too well with the Apple iphone camera, so no guarantees.
If the case doesn't get settled out of court before about this time next year, and there isn't significant deals inked for revenue of around £6-7m per annum then the company will either have to restructure or seek further funds. So from an investment point of view, still significant risk short to medium term I think.
JBongo: Lombard Odier Asset Management was clearly in the frame from early on as they have agreed to underwrite a good proportion of the PrimaryBid offer. LOAM and Griffiths are joined at the hip as far as Nano is concerned. RG has been an investor in Nano for many years (pre-2012), initially using his ORA and Blake Holdings accounts. LOAM first invested on April 1st, 2017, basically buying up Henderson Global's shares. At that entry point, LOAM declared possession of 21.07% of the Company, together with a declared CFD of 2.14%. LOAM and RG are in cahoots in other AIM shareholdings, too.
Cheers JB for the info, on RG I wouldn’t like to say;-)
It feels like a good number on the Board are concerned the amount raised is not enough. Common sense does suggest a need for more. However, if more were raised and a lucrative contract with Merck announced shortly thereafter, shareholders might be correctly upset. Quite possibly I am being over optimistic but had more money been needed I suspect LOAM would have been very happy to oblige on less preferential terms.
In my view, that LOAM is parting with £2.14m on such a narrow discount, suggests expectation of an upside in the near term.
I agree. Looks to be a very minor dilution but now with the additional funds raised over what they initially expected they have the reassurance of 'cash runway' to 2022, rather than the previous 2021, which was concerning some posters. I suppose the other plus is that if Samsung were hoping NANO would weaken with diminishing cash and delay as long as they can, that's going to be harder for them to do now(?).
Only saw the RNS at 8PM last night but managed to set up PrimaryBid account and request 5000 shares before 9. Had an email from them this morning confirming I will get them, so hopefully most small retail investors will get any extra shares they wanted. The discount is small but for those thinking of topping up, it seemed a good oppo (ignoring today's price action!).
GLA
Dream on if you think ME or NP are going to step down. What would they do?
Nano were screwed by Samsung. That much is pretty obvious. Hence the litigation.
Apple were attracted by QDot tech.
There is value in nano for sure.
But it goes to prove how difficult disruptive technology is hard to commercialise.