Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
If they had any serious, fundamental doubts about this court case, or knew something we didn’t, volume would be easily 10 million plus, and the SP would be about half what it is now. They own nearly 20pc of the company, this is bog standard risk management on their part.
It’s amazing to think how well the SP has tolerated so many shares being funnelled into the market. It’s all been very orderly and shows how Lombard have been responsible in their selling.
I don’t think any long term holder will be sweating the minutae of the SP movement to be honest. The volumes are way down on yesterday, we are running of the final fumes of traders finalising positions with the odd PI taking a punt or trimming. Massive news just days away and I think Most have made their mind up by now to stick or twist.
Can we give the comments on each penny of SP movement a rest please?
Anyone with experience in similar scenarios…How likely is it Nano will be granted a market suspension? And how much notice will Nano need to give before it’s brought into effect if there is one? Could be lots of volatility tomorrow in anticipation.
Flying, I agree with you and you make great points that I wholeheartedly accept. But remember that Samsung’s lawyers will be grafting for the duration of the trial, to ‘frame’ the damages in a lower ball park than our lawyers will be. So that does remain a tail risk here, especially if the jury took the view that Nano is a small company and should be grateful of even a small award. Unlikely but not out of the question. As I said in my original post I do agree that the whole case supports a high damages beyond what has been forecast. If there is any justice that will be so. But my overarching point is the ‘third way’ ie low damages will be just as powerful for value creation in the fullness of time.
I guess I’m just living up to my name and trying to see this from as many angles as possible. It seems black and white at first glance but there are shades of grey too.
Good discussion All, thank you and I agree with much of what has been discussed here.
One point that I think does bear repeating is that should a fairly low damages award be given there is a chance, in the short term, that this will be misinterpreted by the market as bad news when it is not.
At risk of stating the obvious, the key threshold is winning the case. Of secondary value is the dollar damages for the very simple reason that Nanoco’s ultimate objective, as proved by the worldwide litigation, is a settlement and licensing arrangement. With a win, a critical hurdle towards that end goal is achieved. Even with a low dollar damages, such is the volume of Samsung’s QD production, even a modest licensing arrangement puts us at multiples of the current SP.
For what it’s worth I do think that high damages is a distinct possibility, I’m just offering the argument that a low damages will not dent serious value creation in the medium term, even though the market might see it differently in the short term.
Intrusive and Morbox. Do you think Samsung pulled out of making an offer when they spotted Nanoco’s fishing rod? However, they made a mistake in even showing any interest in the first place. In that respect the tactic worked perfectly.
A week today. Excited would be an understatement. Finally a chance for Nano to tell their story in full. In what is likely to be a technically complex case, the narrative and timeline of collaboration between Samsung and Nanoco will reverberate through the entire case. It’s going to be a nervy one for sure but relieved it’s finally here and that Nano have this golden opportunity for justice.
There is so much riding on this but it was the asymmetry that attracted me to this company. Such has been the scale of Samsung’s infringement that an overnight multibagger is a realistic proposition. A licensing deal to follow and we are talking SP in pounds not pence.
I’m sure I’m not alone in having everything crossed. There may be some nerves so let’s all be nice to one another.
Malcolm, from what I can see the forecast is due to improve considerably from Thursday, with temps hitting circa 16-20 degrees. So hopefully all will be well by trial day!
Just wanted to say merry Christmas to you all. Though we be small in number this is a special board populated by knowledgeable and passionate posters who are generous with their research and thoughts. Thank you.
Whilst 2022 hasn’t been a rip roaring year for the SP, it has been vital in terms of building the strong foundations we now sit on. Whether that leads to truly transformational news next year remains to be seen, but I don’t think Nano and their legal representatives have put a foot wrong. Tenner has steered the ship with clarity and I think his leadership has been a huge plus for the company - I am glad he will be in Texas to witness what will unfold there. With the trial so soon, let’s hope 2023 gets off to a flier.
Good luck to all and merry Christmas everyone!
You’ve changed your tune Kats!
NGR why do you have to get so personal? Ok so you view things differently to Sammy in terms of the case. But the constant digs make you come across as a bit bitter.
It’s a matter of days now til the event is upon us that we’ve been waiting years for. Let’s focus on that.
I see this from both sides.
My personal take is that the CEO being at the trial is largely symbolic, and I don’t really see, from a legal strategy point of view, how it makes any difference. It’s important to recognise our legal team are primed and ready for battle. Once the court case is up and running, they will be ‘in the zone’ and in full flow as a collective unit. Other than being there in person and receiving briefs of the day’s progress, I don’t see how BT figures in any of it in any truly meaningful way.
That said, besides any settlement sign offs etc, it just feels like the right thing that the CEO is there. It sends out a strong message, the right message, and I for one as a shareholder am supportive of him being there to see (hopefully) justice being done. As others have said, this could be a real watershed moment for the company. How right would it be for him to be quoted in the next RNS from the steps of a Texas courthouse.
Hawi, my guess is the order is going to be something of a moveable feast and he wants to give himself as much wiggle room as possible. The downside to the industry Nanoco operate in is very large supply chains and lots of scope for potential delay. I’m with Nanonano, I’m relaxed on timings so long as it happens. If it is the VR headset, as has been mooted, then I think it’s a fair assumption that it will happen. Of course a product being totally panned isn’t out of the question, but it is unlikely at this stage I feel.
Don’t let NGR see that post Bonzo. The one thing he hates more than being wrong is an Algo…
Agreed Nano. It’s been a great year for Nano I feel. Sure the SP hasn’t exactly gone bananas this year but everything feels very solid and our progress in the court case has been superb.
I like the idea of the trial being so early on in the new year. Here’s hoping it kick starts a truly transformative year for this company and its long suffering shareholders.
Not forgetting the trading update very soon. Could there be a nice little surprise between now and then?
I added just a wee bit more yesterday. With so little time left it could easily gap up at any minute.
Sigh. I shan’t venture any further down this cul de sac but it’s clear that you don’t understand the concept of algo trading if you think humans have anything to do with it once it is in play and actively trading! It’s either off or on. And when it’s on, it’s operating at many thousands of times faster than any human being could possibly fathom.
As to the idea of humans developing the algorithms in the first place, yes that’s obviously true but clearly a different topic of discussion! We are talking about algo trading not how algorithms are made and developed. So it’s not me be being ‘disingenuous’ by introducing a straw man argument…
NGR no they don’t. The whole point of algo trading is the computer being able to spot minutiae within the trading patterns, often within millionths of a second. The algo cannot work if humans ‘oversee’ it as you say and besides they are going way too fast for humans to do anything about it. In extreme cases you may have to disable the algo all together but more often than not it’s left to run its course.
I’m with Sammy on this one. No use trying to use the SP as a meaningful barometer of the prospects here. Important to remember that 60-75% of all transactions are executed by algorithms. So no human influence at all. I suspect there’s been a fair bit of that going on here.
So much of what’s happened in terms of short to medium term price action has been pure momentum trading (both up and down). I don’t buy kat’s narrative that there are this crowd of burnt PIs who got burned at 60p (that price was achieved for a grand total of 10 minutes so I think that was one algo selling to another). And if there were PIs involved, anyone buying around that higher price was likely going to wait for trial outcome regardless.
As I’ve said before this isn’t your typical LSE army pump and dump stock. There’s next to no buzz about Nano outside of our small group. So whilst it remains unprofitable and relatively obscure, the SP will languish in the absence of news.
Nano is the dictionary definition of a calculated risk. At the minute, to the casual observer, Nano doesn’t look very promising at all. IMO it’s actually a way better punt than the average oil casino stock waiting on drill results, which all seem to attract hordes of hapless PIs.
There’s so much that can be researched and so many statistics to benchmark the case against, especially for those with a legal background.
We’re like 1/10 on the ‘buzzometer’ which suits me fine as I keep trying to load pre trial. In just over a month things will look very different, one way or another.