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 also really pleased because it would appear those IIs who voted for this have also supported it. I thinks that's actually quite charitable. I pose a hypothetical scenario, that STM scale up substantially over the next year, revenue projections become possible. At that point the share price will be comprised of a combination of a revenue multiplier and assets. There will be a rocket under the share price in this instance. Alternatively, nothing get released and Nanoco languishes around 20p.
BOOM! This is excellent news! :D I'm astounded but really pleased. This is absolutely the best outcome.
Of course it begs the question why shareholders thought 24p was a good offer and perhaps that sets a ceiling at 24p for now, however if the organic business (currently valued at £0) proves value and of the IP, the upside on this share could be tremendous. Wait for the offer to complete, see where the share price lands, then buy buy buy in my view.
Is 'how to deal with a tender offer' behind a paywall too?
So appears if you tendered your whole holding you would sell about 69% of holding at 24p if i read that right?
Everyones perception of fairness will be different but those with the power have had a long time to think this through with additional info possibly not available to the minions - quite some advantage to exploit a situation IMO.
Oversubscribed then..must think the big boys subscribed fully or subscribed over the 38.5%?
“In total, 160,535,377 Ordinary Shares, being approximately 49.5 per cent. of the Issued Share Capital were validly tendered under the Tender Offer as at 6:00 p.m. on 9 April 2024 (the "Record Date"), meaning that the Tender Offer was oversubscribed. Tenders will therefore be accepted in full from Shareholders who validly tendered a number of Ordinary Shares equal to or less than their Basic Entitlement or those holders of 2,000 Ordinary Shares or less, irrespective of the proportion tendered. Following a scale back exercise, tenders in excess of the Basic Entitlement will be satisfied to the extent of the Basic Entitlement plus approximately 49.6 per cent. of the excess Shares tendered.”
To be fair the mechanism might have suited the larger shareholders consulted but all shareholders ( save the sub 2000 share owners ) have been treated the same and have the same opportunity to participate or not. There maybe some benefit to larger holders if the company start the share buyback immediately as some holders will not be able to deal in their shares or have the money paid out to try to buy back in the market at lower levels. I think from what BT said ..a special dividend would come off the price penny for penny that a major aim here was to get the valuation up through stealth ..since they do not need funding it seems a vanity exercise as much as anything..you want the price up demonstrate commerciality. Anyway lets see if it works, so far yes to a certain extent as the EV has effectively jumped but see what happens in the next week or so.
If the tender was designed to benefit large shareholders at the expense of smaller ones i.e. deliberate exploitation or an abuse of power, how could it ever be proved ?
The only thing we can count on is uncertainty but one thing is certain, its always the poor that gets the blame !
Just in case..widely dismissed as uneconomic the scale of the market for breakthrough materials means solar is still a viable market…some applications such as EV roofs mean that there is scope for high performance solar materials where the space relative to yield is very important i guess.
https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/solar-panel-record-quantum-renewable-energy-b2526484.html
They should have tendered a smaller percentage holding, but allocated a higher purchase price, i.e. 37p or above. The whole thing wreaks imo.
Good post..see what we can garner from subscription level…might not be much initially but a full subscription would certainly indicate that the larger holders have subscribed at least the 38.5%. Wonder what breakdown they give ? Certainly will have to announce what folks that oversubscribed got which will show the level of participation in the standard offer. Some number crunching will be in order!
Uncertainty. Yes.
If the tender is under-subscribed it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect the shares to start trading at around 24p. If fully subscribed, there might be an immediate drop to reflect the the new cash value (although who will be selling in volume) but I suspect the real changes in SP are going to happen when it emerges which way the big holders (basically LOAM) have gone. Rightly or wrongly, I think their participation/non-participation in the tender will be interpreted as no-confidence/confidence in future potential and the SP will adjust accordingly. If they have participated (and quite possibly at much more than 38.5% of holding if PIs have been put off by the low tender offer / recent campaign of "good news") the next guess will be whether they are genuinely trying to exit or simply drive the price down to buy back in later.
Unfortunately, I don't think we will find out much tomorrow other than the level of uptake. It isn't clear to me whether major holders are required to issue TR-1 notices in connection with the tender, particularly if their percentage holding doesn't change.
What's happened has happened, but for me this was the most negative aspect of the way the tender was structured - it seemed almost designed to create uncertainty for PIs that can be exploited by large holders.
I’m surprised the SP hasn’t gone down more to reflect the likely reduction in cash in the business. I guess there’s uncertainty over the uptake of the tender offer, and some larger holders may decline to take part to increase their holdings after shares are cancelled.
I believe they’re due to announce tender results tomorrow, so we may see an ‘XD’ style adjustment then.
I’m hoping for a price of well under 20p (as low as possible obs), and will start buying again if that happens.
Tomorrow
Top of the class Xenon
Maybe not, there's still another 4 above you !
So when do we get notification that the Tender has been completed and all shares cancelled. Days or weeks ?
25th April. Circular, p.16:
https://wp-nanoco-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2024/03/Circular-final.pdf
So when do the people who tendered their shares actually get paid for them ?
It would be ignoble of me to react..
Maybe Xenon might have the answer :
He's becoming quite a gas although naturally inert !
Yes, tell us all NGR.
If believable, we'll all trust that the guidance is realistic and be able to put it to bed, for now.
TG2D was insinuating they needed to announce new commercial deals- I disagree.
He was stating himself he doesn’t know the margins. He only knows parts of the equation. To question how the company arrived at guiding BE at some point in FY25 is fine. Stating figures as de facto is what I take exception to. As ever it snowballs.
NGR the assessment by TG2D that the company would need to sell some more ( a lot more) materials to reach cashflow breakeven and then to apply a realistic ( if not guided) profit margin to work out what type of sales would be needed to achieve that target was not inventing stuff..it was using available information to extrapolate what sales would be needed to meet that level of free cashflow..its sort of what analysts might do to reverse engineer such guidance.
Yes their fixed costs could go up more..then sales would have to go up even more.
Yes the margins could be different ..but i would have thought after 20 years of development and their “unique” materials they should command a decent margin?
Yes they could get some display revenues..but not exactly guiding to that any time soon now.
Yes they could get another development agreement could add a £1m a year revenues if they do.
Yes they are now sitting on cash earning interest ..which i have highlighted which has positive impact on cash breakeven.
So yes there are variables but it seems sensible to get a handle on what commercially would need to be achieved to meet that guidance. If you disagree that the company would need to sell a huge uplift in gen 1 material sales to achieve the guidance then i am all ears how they intend doing it.
Kooba I am defending guidance for what it is. Others were adding information that hadn't been given by the company.
Loved Mr Benn