The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode with London Stock Exchange Group's Chris Mayo has just been released. Listen 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.
Carlos - I feel strongly about holding this board to account. Certainly not a waste of my time (or life). What made you decide to invest here?
No one will be inclined to invest if there are a group of embittered investors pouring scorn on the board on a daily basis. If your objective is to suppress the share you’re winning
I mean why waste your life , Time is short... Go and focus on something you do believe in.
I have been saying this for months..
Tm58 - Yup - we’re are strange bunch! Sheer bloody mindedness in my case. Anyone considering whether to make an investment in Nanoco needs to know how the company treats its retail investors.
I am surprised that some posters on this board are still invested. They say they have been cheated on, lied to and misled. They don't trust the board or CEO. They do not expect the expected breakeven point to be achieved or the eventual profitability of the company.
I cannot fathom why anybody who thinks like that would stay invested.
24p is the Tender Offer price. Fact!
TG2D you were not lied to. Read the disclaimers at the bottom next time.
Nanoco made sure it’s LTIP and Deferred Bonus Plan weren’t adversely impacted by its “return of value” - They are very good at looking after themselves!
37p was the market at the time. Fact
Mugged yourself off
Over emotional IMO !
“ They said they are returning value to the shareholders and they are returning value to shareholders”
When you do a raise at 37p and give back only 24p that is a destruction in (as opposed to a return of) shareholder value.
TG2D once again conflating a jury win, with an award x damages with delays, appeals, costs, v risk of losing with a negotiated settlement.
We will never agree on this. You mugged yourself off and that's the fact.
Retail investors where blatantly lied to that's why Tariq is in court suing LOAM.
No doubt if he was privy to 'prefered' information he wouldn't be suing LOAM abd no doubt would have joined RG running fir them there hills leaving all us retail investors to pick up the tab and the following shambles!
Why should I question what the board states?
They said they preferred a negotiated settlement and got one.
They said they would have validated products and they validated the products
They said they would get commercial orders and they received commercial orders
They said they are returning value to the shareholders and they are returning value to shareholders
They say they expect more orders.....let's see.
If I recall rightly Turner Pope, Edison and I think the FT quoted that the settlement would be over 1 Dollar, not sure if they meant US Dollars or Zimbabwean!
As for NGR1616 utter tripe on legal paywalls, guess what I paid and visited the legal site and huge swaths of documents were 'redacted' ie blanked out, just a tiny little brief foot note on page 143 if I recall mentioning in about three or four words lower value could be $150m....yet all the 'professionals' advice and the Boards comms 'multiples' of market cap for over two years, which last year incidentally was over $200m....
Troublesome. There were none invested to be disappointed - that's the point. It was never as good as many here thought it was going to be.
There is indications from STM of future sales that has led the company to issue guidance as they see it. They absolutely could and quite possibly will miss it. But they could and quite possibly will achieve it.
My company stopped issuing guidance because the demand for our services dropped. There was the potential that demand could pick up in the financial window but there was no clear indication when or if it were to what extent top they withdrew guidance for a time. Now with confirmed orders and more discussions about future demand there is some stability and guidance was reintroduced last year.
Nanoco could (and some appear to suggest they perhaps should) say they have no idea what lies ahead. But if they are receiving indications they will be getting repeat business and that is likely to grow then it is incumbent on them to publish that information.
For me this is about mobiles in 2026 and other sensor applications will be the cherry on the cake. Reflect on that.
Kooba - I agree - Brian’s good at talking (just wish he had the walking to go with it).
NGR1616
Then SELL!!!!
Sorry does not compute.
You need to tell us why you never question a word the Board states, rather odd behaviour is it not?
Can anyone cite examples where professionals or independent institutions concluded that the settlement was in line with expectations or guidance outlined by the company - I only recall 'disappointment'.
Maybe that was an unnecessary 'emotional' expression also !
So far the evidence is one confirmed order with STM for 2 gen 1 materials that we have no idea of the size of the order except that it is small case use and barely registers in the interim results which showed revenues drop in the first half and 5 months later there appears no further orders.
The results and marketing material research do not support any revenue build up in the current FY to end July only the development revenues already known.
So there is just talk , no firm commitment in terms of future orders and thats about it.
“ Because they are professionals” - Other explanations are available!
It will be interesting to see how Hamoodi gets on with his litigation with LOAM.
Then SELL!!!!
NGR1616
I would say where are the institutional investors now?
RG sold up and did a runner, clearly has no faith in future prospects here.
Tariq Hammodi is suing LOAM along the lines of alleged miss advice and losing out on preferred share holder information to make an informed investment decision on the Samsung settlement debacle.
While LOAM sold down to just around 14.5% holding.
While Nigel wants to offload a large chunky of his shares.
It seems to me a right old shambles at the moment with institutional investors running for them there hills in every direction...
But given the lack of trust with this Board who would blame them!