Member Info for Baoxiou

see this link then for his email

https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/final-notices/sir-christopher-gent-2022.pdf - we need to all power together

POWER TO THE APES!!!!

tryign that again

fca.org.uk

email address is @fca.org.uk

I reiterate what I said yesterday... no one responded because everyone's heads were still in the sand...

Brian Tenner and the board have enabled one of the biggest pump and dumps that the UK small cap markets have seen in years. Look at the timing of his pumps in the media versus sales by LOAM and Richard Griffiths.

I suggest that we all call Martin Watts at the FCA: the Authority (direct line: 020 7066 7140/ email: martin.watts2@fca.org.uk). He cracks down on this stuff - nasty nasty nasty....

The announcement on Jan 6 looks nothing more then an attempt to feed euphoria for people with insider information to exit. I point back to what I posted yesterday about Tenner's comments at the end of August about telling Samsung to get stuffed even if they offered a premium to £137m.

Very clear now - LOAM clearly saw brutal settlement offers come in and knew they needed to eject. Tenner created a bid for them to exit by spewing bullsht to the brokers, the media, and in his announcements.

Call the FCA and the serious fraud office, now.

My view is that this isn't subject to tax.

Consider that Brian Tenner's salary all in comp is based on LBITDA calculations so he doesn't have anything to lose here. He stands to make £1m when this is all said and done. Cold, hard, cash. This whole thing is a rug pull if I have ever seen one.

I just noticed that LOAM were also sellers at the end of August as Brian was out public making these comments . I had totally missed this. If he was really about to tell Samsung to "get stuffed" even if a decent premium was offered for the company and was so confident and LOAM were on the board at the time. What was he really doing - was he simply trying to create a bid from retail and private investors for the stock. Pump and dump anyone?

I'd say when this is all said and done, the FCA and the Serious Fraud Office will be having a good look at what looks like a very incestuous relationship between the whole lot. Shameful really.

Long time observer here. I got involved last summer after watching the case progress. Currently out of the money on my position and sitting here nervously waiting for news. I bought into this in August ahead of trial having read CEO Brian Tenner's comments in a Telegraph story about Nanoco. Brian told the Telegraph at the time that “We are getting to a level of confidence where if Samsung came along and offered a significant premium, we’d say get stuffed.”. That was when the market cap was £137m. Those were very strong words to use. To me that meant that the company would not certainly not accept an offer (net to Nanoco) anywhere near what the market is implying today. If we end up with anything less then this then Brian Tenner is simply a liar and master of deceiving PIs. I work in the city and know Richard Griffiths was selling at that time so I ask myself were we patsies thrown to the slaughter?

I can no longer find that article on the Telegraph's website but it is on Press Reader.
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/20220829/282424173031103

A UK tech firm is gearing up for a Texan legal fight with Samsung over alleged use of its technology without licensing it.

Nanoco, based in Runcorn, Cheshire, is seeking up to $500m (£425m) in damages from the South Korean tech giant for what it claims is the unauthorised use of its quantum dot technology, used in high-quality televisions.

The company claims in court documents Samsung used its technology without permission and alleges that executives at the conglomerate admitted they did not understand the technology before meeting with Nanoco. Samsung was asked for comment.

Nanoco has brought the case in Texas because it is a large market for televisions in the US and because Texas’s Eastern District is known as a “rocket docket” for the speed of its cases.

Both sides will have a week to persuade eight jurors of their case. This includes time for the jury to deliberate. In Texas, jurors also dictate the award, should there be one.

The trial is slated to start on Sept 12.

Brian Tenner, Nanoco chief executive, said placing the fate of his company in the hands of a jury gathered from the small Texan town of Marshall is risky.

“You could end up holding your head in your hands even if you win,” he said.

Nanoco develops a material that emits light when charged. The colour these particles emit depends on their size. In a TV, this allows for sharper colours. Manufacturers can charge a premium for screens using the technology. Nanoco’s process manages this without the use of cadmium, a toxic metal.

Earlier this month Nanoco announced it would also sue Samsung in Germany, in an effort to stop what Nanoco claims is the use of its technology in the country.

Samsung had the opportunity to buy

Nanoco in 2019 when it was up for sale.

Mr Tenner said: “We are getting to a level of confidence where if Samsung came along and offered a significant premium, we’d say