We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Tenner seems commercially focused and seems to be developing good pipeline for the company. He’s always had me convinced from that angle in terms of investor meets etc. However, to forego a licensing agreement and let Samsung off the hook, with commercial viability as the ultimate goal, that I’m really quite surprised about, and it’s come as a big surprise to the market too. A one off sale of your IP seems like an odd way to generate revenue if you ask me.
For my money, without a licensing agreement the settlement needs to be a healthy figure. If it isn’t, it does make you wonder if Tenner blinked just when we needed him to say ‘get stuffed’. For now, I hold him to his word on fair value and look forward to the detail.
Forgive the poor grammar of my impassioned rant haha.
Henry I share your sentiments.
It all boils down to what this actual settlement looks like now but there’s no way of cutting the manner of communication that doesn’t raise questions. It’s not been handled well.
As for the long term holders who have shouldered so much risk for so long, were there when the very existence of Nanoco was a foregone conclusion, they are expecting a settlement that does not sell this company short. Especially if a forward licensing agreement is not on the cards and is intended as an all encompassing settlement.
I absolutely get the company’s desire to move on from this whole fiasco…but if we get something like 100m I don’t think there will be many LTHs who will feel anything other than upset and anger that we have been sold down the river, and if that we would all have supported Nanoco in proceeding to trial.
I will happily wait for detail from the company as to what this settlement.
But it’s important that we remember that this is all conjecture, which brings me full circle to my original point that the whole purpose of an RNS is to combat conjecture, not fuel it.
I’ll await the details of the settlement. Feels like a huge overreaction today and traders capitalised on it.
I think the RNS was a misstep, it has tried to cool a market that had hardly overreacted in the first place, and has attempted to clarify but produced the opposite effect. The shares should’ve been suspended til the detailed were known. I will be mightily disappointed if they’ve capitulated with a poor deal at the 11th hour, I just cannot see that happening. See you all again for the full RNS!
The fact that we are here reading runes in this way suggests the RNS was a misstep. Either suspend the market and wait for the details, or don’t say anything at all. This has fuelled speculation and misinterpretation. I don’t think there is any way they could have worded that RNS, short of actual details of the deal, that would have produced anything other than confusion.
That said the Friday price action has still created lots of headroom here. The bone of contention is the litigation vs patents which I’ve expressed my view on.
Exactly Ceejay. I’ve read the RNs a few times and there’s been a misunderstanding. The settlement removes risk of all future litigation. It doesn’t give Samsung carte Blanche to use the patents. This settlement deals with past infringement and makes the patents whole. A future licensing agreement must be made separately!!
Granted the RNs is opaque but this is how I read ot
I have to say it is one of those RNS’s that poses more questions than it answers. I would rather they suspend the market til the details could be published, or not have said anything. Still, there’s something for the bulls and the bears out there.
Stt1, we can see you grafting on the other forum mate, buzz off.
I’d try and close that short tomorrow if I were you!
As we know, some spirited selling (we presume LOAM) kept a lid on what could’ve been a wild day. I’m just wondering, do you think that they will continue to funnel shares into the open market? I’m surprised they haven’t sought another II as a buyer for their shares. I am pretty sure there will be institutional interest in the near future and so it’s not as if LOAM are out of options if continuing to get rid of their shares is the intention.
Haha always had max respect for you Feeks, along with everyone else on here. Looking forward to meeting everyone once the settlement deal is RNSd
Giga I thought it was your twin, Nigwitty that had litigated so often? ;)
I agree PJT I think the funders slice will have been ‘priced in’ to Tenner’s ‘fair value’ settlement. It’s also worth mentioning that I agree with a previous poster who suggested that any settlement is likely to be whatever range was outlined for a 20% cut for the funders. A bit of an own goal to get to trial day and settle really low and let the funders have such a chunk IMO.
Impressive holdings! I own north of 50k shares but it represents a lot of my worldly wealth. I’m 35 so have put in all I’ve amassed. Average jumped from 25p before to 35p now.
I agree Giga that to be cautious is the best approach. I think even against the most conservative estimates the current SP looks a bargain and anything better will obviously be a bonus
It seems odd you take your lead from a times article that was churned out pretty carelessly and offers no basis whatsoever for the figure, as opposed to what we’ve researched here and what the CEO has been telling us, but to each their own.
10 mil? Is that TR1 territory?
My reasoning is quite simple really. I don’t see a single stock out there that is going to offer the returns I think this share will offer within the next 30 days. I don’t usually trade, and have sat on some paper losses elsewhere for some time, I’ve never been tempted to do anything about that.
But sometimes in life, opportunities come along that are just too good to turn down. And that voice in my head went ‘if not now, when?’. Things like this don’t happen often (where the market gets it badly wrong) and only time will tell if it was the right call or rather silly. But for my own part, on Friday, it was almost automatic. And as I sold down my entire portfolio, I was just hoping the price didn’t suddenly shoot up as everyone saw sense.
He was quoting me, I’m the nutter that’s 100% Nano haha
The only way the current Mcap makes sense is if you assume that analysts are looking at your typical settlement vs a minnow/patent troll. In which case the market is suggesting and pricing in a settlement of 1-200million.
But the market seems to be entirely discounting the actual sales that have been amassed globally, and any future earnings from this tech, which will definitely be encompassed by the settlement, and also the fact that this is a growing market for Samsung, so earnings likely to scale.
I can only ascribe Friday’s action to be a combination of a big seller (loam), traders taking their 20-30pc and Nano being relatively obscure in the wider investing consciousness. But the facts as they stand, whichever way you cut them, do not support such a low price IMO.
Exactly peregrine. Combine that with what our CEO said: fair value for the lifetime of the patents. Long term holders had an edge in the chaos of yesterday because we remember what he said. Now if you trust tenner, and let’s face it he’s done nothing not to earn our trust (track record of underpricing and over delivering) then what would you do?
Yesterday was a hectic but exciting day. 1 stock sits in my portfolio now, solidified some pretty big and long standing losses too, but this is only heading one way in the next 30 days. I genuinely feel the market hasn’t got a clue, and I’ve put my money where my mouth is.