Chris Heminway, Exec-Chair at Time To ACT, explains why now is the right time for the Group to IPO. Watch the video 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.
Hanwha Techwin have certainly dabbled in an extraordinarily diverse range of products, but currently supply CCTV surveillance and semiconductor systems and components. That Dow thread is surely worth pulling on though: orchestral manoeuvres in the dark! The relationship between Samsung and paper manufacturers Hansol is even more intriguing, and there is surely a very interesting story there quite different to the nonsense spun by their corporate liars.
I suspect the case will likely be tightly constrained though, with a laser focus now on patent validity and technical definitions, rather than corporate shenanigans?
The April 2015 article referenced by idontmessabout stated that Dow's attempted sale of its chemical division in Korea to Hanwha Chemical failed. Dow reportedly needed the money to expand its electro material business. The deal seems to have been blocked by Samsung as Hanwha Group instead acquired a 32.4% stake in Samsung Techwin, and a 57.6% stake in Samsung General Chemicals and gained joint managerial control over Samsung Thales and Samsung Total Petrochemicals. It is confusing, but I believe that this company is now Hanwha Techwin and also makes nanoparticles. It seems that Samsung apparently still owns a substantial part of Hanwha Techwin.
idontmessabout and others: Thanks so very much indeed. Very insightful to see that press commentary from April/May, 2015, from which it becomes obvious that Dow were already feeling the pinch.
I've just dug out my notes, which go back to 2011. It's interesting just to get a measure on the time-lines:
23 Jan, 2013- Dow Contract announced.
9 May, 2013- Edelman relocates to USA.
27 September, 2013- Dow Contract amended. Full production expected to begin H1, 2014 (!!!!!!)
24 September, 2014- Dow announces Cheonan Fab build. Production expected to begin H1, 2015 (!!!!!!)
16 December, 2014- LG to use Nano's QDs in its 4K Ultra-HD TV s to be unveiled at CES, Las Vegas, 6-9 Jan, 2015.
30 December, 2014- Revised Contract with Dow. Runcorn-made QDs to be supplied to Dow.
May, 2015- Nanoco moves from AIM to main LSE market.
31 March, 2016- New commercial strategy with Dow. ? Non-exclusive.
27 June, 2016- Samsung Electronics files "QLED" trademark in USA.
22 July, 2016- Wah Hong commercial agreement announced.
1 August, 2016- Merck commercial agreement announced.
28 November, 2016- Purchase of Kodak Patents.
During 2016- Samsung known to be importing its QD-enhanced LCD TVs into USA (and elsewhere).
ooooooOoooooo
Moving on: Kyungseok Lee's submission to the Court was emphatic in stating that, for more than 6 years to date, Samsung Display had not supplied any QDs in any LCD products to S. Electronics.
This still leaves the question of how Hansol fits in. Hansol is not a panel-maker and, hitherto, SE had always relied on SD for its panels.
I apologise for this being boring, but I am just trying to straighten a few things out in my own head. By coming back with its counterclaim that Nano's US 7,588,828 B2 Patent was improperly filed, is Samsung trying to escape any penetration of its internal relationships, including near-related Hansol?
Clear as mud ! But so many thanks to all you good guys for your thoughts, comments and updates from the Court.
Thanks, Idontmessabout. I had never seen this. Why did Dow not complain more loudly? Why did Edelman not reveal that Dow was dead instead of continuing to declare Dow to be a partner? Nanoco worked closely with Dow to build the factory and deserved to have its confidentiality protected. Could Nanoco management have failed to place restrictions on what Dow could do with the factory in case of failure? Why are we left conjecturing? Nanoco needs to release the facts. I cannot imagine that selling the factory to Samsung would not have violated Nanoco non-disclosures. Nor should Dow employees have been allowed to work for Samsung, since they would have been subject to confidential disclosures. Nanoco, please help us understand!
Apologies, hadn’t intended to paste without context. Very little online about what Dow are up to now and what comes out of that plant in Cheonan. Was there any cross-over with SKC who also had a JV with Dow at the same time Nanoco were in involved with them?
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/tech/2020/03/693_176558.html