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.
Nanosys claims to be working in many different fields. They also claim significant progress in electroluminescent QDs. I suspect that this claim is premature and may qualify as vaporware.
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/electroluminescent-quantum-dots-are-coming-sooner-than-you-think.3164041/
Samsung have made multiple investments in Nanosys and, inexplicably, touted Nanosys' Cadmium technology--more than a little hypocritical! Promoting Nanosys seemingly benefited Samsung's long-term goal of blocking Nanoco success. Samsung frequently referred to Nanosys as a 'partner'. Did Nanosys also steal Nanoco technology?
Remember that Nanoco's is a platform technology and likely included in many different product, not just TV. The Samsung Chaebol includes ~100 different companies, many of which could eventually use QDs. We cannot trust Samsung. Perhaps, the answer is to require that Samsung purchase quantum dots from Nanoco or a Nanoco licensee such as Dow/Dupont.
Barbon, Hawi: I have never said that Nanoco or Samsung would negotiate a settlement for the US alone. Please do not insinuate that I did. By the way, BT said very clearly that Nanoco would be willing to settle. I have always said that I don't want a settlement prior to the trial. Nor do I believe that a Samsung buyout is possible.
Barbon, Hawi: Don't know how I could be clearer. There has been much discussion here regarding a possible early settlement. I was simply agreeing with some that settlement will happen only after the trial. Perhaps you have a point in criticizing my comment?
Brilliant analyses by LordWM and SteakandAle. As LWM said, "the stakes are potentially very large for Samsung, considering global TV sales to date, future TV sales, display sales to other OEMs and anyone in their supply chain they've engaged to infringe N's patents." Any settlement prior to the US trial would have to be global. This would expose all of Samsung's wrongdoings and be too complex to reach in the short term . Samsung would not want to admit everything prior to the US Trial. Yet, they would want to avoid a global injunction. I think we could expect Samsung and Nanoco to immediately begin final global negotiations if and when Nanoco wins the US lawsuit.
Agreed, NGR. Just suggesting that Nanoco should expect Samsung to remain in character and apply subtle but strong pressure in Texas. It would be naive for Nanoco to assume that all jurists would follow Gilstrap's instructions. I hope that US funding reduces the danger, but I recognize that Samsung's greed has shown no bounds to date.
Gilstrap seems honorable. The jury is impressionable and will be influenceable by lawyers. Media is the wild card. Mintz and founder need to publicize discreetly Samsung's historically despicable behavior as well as the Nanoco-Samsung history and the David-Goliath aspect.
The semiconductor bill approved in US congress and now moving to the Senate could be a boost for Nanoco. I have been somewhat concerned that Samsung might use the $17B Texas plant to influence the Texas court. Allocating bIllions to Samsung would alleviate their pain and make it difficult for them to leave. Nanoco may soon need to expand manufacturing. Why not build in Texas and get a share of the money? Samsung probably intended to use part of the Texas facility to manufacture quantum dots. Now that they will likely not be allowed to manufacture QDs, money intended for producing Samsung QDs could be used to fund a Nanoco plant in Texas.
@troublesome: I suspect that Nigwit infects every board he is on. He is rude. He brings us down. He bullies people; they defend themselves. Fed up, I once turned this board off and moved to the ADVFN board. When he moved to ADVFN, I returned here. He is now on both boards, so no benefit in moving. I wish he were not so rude.
@SteakandAle: Like you, I have been around a long time and would have agreed with you had I not googled "order visibility". The world has changes while we often don't. For example, Level 4 manufacturing, in which STMicro has made huge advances with new micro sensors and micro communication devices of many types, has enabled world changing supply chain and order and inventory tracking advances. Nanoco sensors could eventually play a big role in this future. It is not at all surprising that BT would use terminology that would reflect STMicro's role in this future. If you google "order visibility', you will see many references to this new definition.
@SteakandAle: Like you, I have been around a long time and would have agreed with you had I not googled "order visibility". The world has changes while we often don't. For example, Level 4 manufacturing, in which STMicro has made huge advances with new micro sensors and micro communication devices of many types, has enabled shocking supply chain and order tracking advances. Nanoco sensors could eventually play a big role in this future. It is not at all surprising that BT would use terminology that would reflect STMicro's role in this future. If you google "order visability', you will see many references to this new definition.