The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust 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.
Much is made os the company’s apparently unique ability to produce CFQDs at scale , this is an interesting piece from a few months ago and i can’t remember if it was posted..anyhoo thought a refresh in the absence of anything else new.
https://displaydaily.com/cadmium-the-2024-update-on-quantum-dots-and-rohs-regulations/
I think Nanoco is well aware that others can made CFQD's at scale - just look at Samsung...
Their message is that they have an "IP moat". Link below to the FY23 final results, see page 20. It is Nanoco's assertion that, whilst they know other companies can make CFQD's at scale, they cannot do so without using Nanoco's seeding IP. And that IP has passed the test of PTAB as well as a huge legal test against Samsung. So much so that Samsung had to take out a licence to continue to produce CFQD's using Nanoco's IP.
https://wp-nanoco-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2023/10/Final-Results-FY23-FINAL.pdf
Having IP is one thing. Being able to say that Samsung would rather pay us $150m and take out a licence with us than go to trial takes that IP to the next level.
To add to that, we know Nanoco is developing next gen lead free dots. Again, we know other companies are also developing those but the company has said they would still need to use our IP to produce them at scale.
I was referring to the legal ability not the commercial ability which has been clearly demonstrated by others producing quality mass commercial product , something Nanoco is yet to prove.the article was interesting more in terms of how slow moving regulation is and the carve outs that happen which means the CFQD argument has not panned out in the way many expected a decade ago…and still is somewhat opaque how in moves forwards on some devices.
Some positive changes have taken place recently. On 19th March 2024 the European Commission adopted changes to the exemption for cadmium in quantum dots for LED applications (see links below).
https://www.useforesight.io/news/eu-amends-cadmium-exemption-in-electronics-tightening-use-in-quantum-dot-leds#:~:text=EU%20Amends%20Cadmium%20Exemption%20in%20Electronics%2C%20Tightening%20Use%20in%20Quantum%20Dot%20LEDs,-RoHS&text=The%20new%20directive%20specifies%20that,directly%20deposited%20on%20LED%20chips.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13468-Hazardous-substances-in-electrical-and-electronic-equipment-exemption-for-cadmium-in-quantum-dots-for-LED-applications_en
“Previously, certain applications utilizing cadmium-based quantum dots were exempted from RoHS restrictions to accommodate for the lack of viable alternatives that matched their performance. However, the European Commission's latest action narrows the scope of these exemptions, reflecting advancements in alternative technologies and a commitment to minimizing hazardous substances in EEE.
1.Limited Exemption for Display and Projection Applications: The new directive specifies that cadmium can be used in downshifting semiconductor nanocrystal quantum dots directly deposited on LED chips for display and projection applications, but now with a stricter limit of less than 5 μg of cadmium per mm² of LED chip surface and a maximum amount of 1 mg per device. This exemption is set to expire on 31 December 2027, signalling a clear timeline for the industry to transition to cadmium-free alternatives.
2.Expiry of Previous Exemptions: The existing exemption, which allowed for broader use of cadmium in downshifting cadmium-based semiconductor nanocrystal quantum dots for use in display lighting applications, will expire 18 months after the publication of the new directive. This change underscores the Commission's intention to gradually phase out the use of cadmium in EEE, aligning with broader environmental protection and public health goals.”
So, things are moving in the right direction regarding RoHS restrictions on the use of Cadmium in QDs. We should expect anyone using Cadmium Quantum Dots in their products are on notice and will already be planning to move away from Cadmium - in advance of - the current exemptions being removed.
If we trust in our upheld IP for the mass production of CFQD’s then maybe we will end up producing some of those dots ourselves, or selling a licence to allow others to produce them.
As for us proving we can produce a quality mass commercial product I'm going to trust that ST has done their due diligence...
I.e. if ST believes we can produce dots that are good enough to be included in their sensors, which in turn can be mass produced for use in mobile phones then I believe it.
I was of course referring to mass production of CFQD’s that was the subject … we have not commercially supplied CFQD’s to anyone ever as far as i am aware. Unless you think we have.
IMO, it's an absolute disgrace regards the slow progress towards the complete banning of the use of cadmium.
The fact that companies are able to advertise their products i.e. screens as 'cadmium-free' just because they contain less than 100ppm eg. 99ppm is a joke. It diminishes and almost negates the years of hard work by Nanoco in achieving their unique ability to produce their truly cadmium free dots on a commercial scale.
Some cheerful info regards Lead and Cadmium and their global impact through e-waste :
https://nswai.org/docs/Lead%20and%20Cadmium%20Global%20Impacts%20Through%20E-Waste.pdf