The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
Worth looking back at the Edison note on the STMicro deal 4 years ago..
They do comment on there being a minimum size commercial order ..which has never been disclosed, but the Nov order did not move the 2024 revenue forecasts.
https://www.edisongroup.com/research/supply-agreement-with-stmicroelectronics/26954/
I doubt STMicro would behave in the same manner as Samsung who are probably one of the most sued defendants in IP infringement cases in the US courts.
But with big companies focus can change and new approaches to markets and demand can change. STM have been collaborating for quite a while with Nanoco now so I don’t think they will just do a Samsung , but I don’t know who else they might be working with..that’s the thing with confidentiality agreements difficult to know if there were any parallel or internal developments ongoing. Noparticular reason to think so ..but one very small order in six months since validation for the 2 materials ( thought there was to be 3 ?) for SWIR sensors with the Gen 1 materials does not appear that strong yet and with the non toxic Gen 2 s already advancing its difficult to see the ramp up in demand just yet. The advantage of the Gen 2 materials will be that the IP is better protected by Nanoco core patents I understand.
Well I suppose if anyone has complete faith in BT there should be nothing to worry about.
He did say that he wouldn't be 'bullied' again and he has been shown to play a mean 'game of bluff' cough, cough !
Surely there can be no doubts that he has every eventuality covered, although he does seems to benefit personally no matter what happens.
Kooba, yep fair point. I think we have to hope that what happened with Samsung was a life lesson for us and that we are no longer so trusting. I guess there’s a degree of faith required that restrictions in contract and legal terms - and in knowledge shared - reduces the likelihood a partner takes advantage of us again.
IDL, great post.
I’ve been doing a bit of research recently as I realised my understanding of the relationship between us and STM, and between our separate products & processes, was lacking. You are probably way ahead of me. Busy right now but would like to chat more about this.
Lol - Kooba
Terrorwit will just love that quote !
“My concern here is that Nanoco have been supplying dots in small quantities for an initial (and successful) evaluation programme with STM electing to produce dots in-house for commercial production.”
But surely that can’t happen in commercial joint venture agreements using Nanoco IP ! Oh !
“There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”
― George W. Bush
2d - a new poster. Welcome to the board!
Don't see the point of your question.
...in house for commercial production.
Went on for too long!
Xenon: "Nanoco produces the dots, the raw material. STM make the product they badge as “quantum film”. So I think when they refer to quantum materials they mean the film and not the dots."
I think this is the model we would all like to see - kilos of Nanoco dots being regularly shipped to STM for incorporation in their mass-produced sensors. The description of the second project advertised would be consistent with this:
"Image sensors with a thin film photodetector active layer integrated on 300mm CMOS wafers have already been demonstrated with solution-processed Pb-based Colloidal Quantum Dot (CQD) films. The goal of this thesis subject is to develop a new photodiode architecture based on a heterojunction between silicon and III-V QD materials, working in the SWIR wavelength range from 1 um to 2.5 um. This heterojunction is expected to lead to image sensors with lower noise and better reliability compared to traditional above-integrated-circuit integration for QD-based photodiodes. "
The part about work to date with Pb-based dots is consistent with what we know from elsewhere and the first-generation materials Nanoco appear to have been supplying to STM. The objectives of the project - working to integrate III-V (second-generation) materials into devices would also be consistent with Nanoco-STM agreements that have been announced (although it sounds like a long way from a commercial product).
However, the first project advertised is the one that worries me more:
"This PhD project will employ a stepwise approach to develop InAs and InSb QDs of precisely controlled absorption onset, low size distribution and optimised surface passivation enabling stable performance when integrated into imagers working at elevated temperatures up to 150C. In the first stage, the colloidal synthesis of InAs, InSb and In(As,Sb) alloy QDs will be optimized to be able to cover the target wavelength range of 1 – 2 um and obtain narrow size distributions less than 10%. The method that will be employed to impart thermal stability of solid-state QD films for devices will be the use of surface passivation. One method to be explored is by growing one or more shells of appropriate semiconductor material on the core QDs. The second method will be novel ligand development and implementation in solution and/or the solid-state on its own and combined with shell growth. "
So, yes, this addresses integration into films but starting from the point of optimising the synthesis of the (second-generation) dots themselves. Isn't that what Nanoco are supposed to be bringing to this relationship? Now, those are a pretty ambitious set of goals for a single PhD project and we don't know what other resources STM are putting into this, so they could be a long way from production at scale. My concern here is that Nanoco have been supplying dots in small quantities for an initial (and successful) evaluation programme with STM electing to produce dots in-house for commerc
Hi IDL and restorer
I saw this recently but came away seeing it as positive.
Nanoco produces the dots, the raw material. STM make the product they badge as “quantum film”. So I think when they refer to quantum materials they mean the film and not the dots.
I see it as very encouraging that STM believe in the technology and that they are investing in their next generation film. And we know they are doing this in conjunction with Nanoco as the company told us.
So good news I think.
Somewhat concerning. If they are running their own R&D effort in QD material development to the point of recruiting PhD students I wonder whether the high volume orders for Nanoco are really going to materialise if and when ST do ramp up production.