Member Info for BeContrarian

Thanks for the update Kooba.

Would a tear down even reveal nano dots? Would a further test on the sensors need to be done to establish what’s in it? Forgive my ignorance on such matters haha

Price sensitive has always been a massive red herring and notoriously difficult to prove. It has, does and will continue to happen. Any CEO buying shares ever it could be argued is insider trading because they know far more than we do.

What is discussed on boards and what can be proved on paper and in a court of law are very very different things. We know it, they know it.

I’m not a fan of this if it pees off the customer or our supply chain. Rather it be an open secret. The market would catch on either way…

I work full time so it was never a possibility for me. I’ve posted questions for the QandAs along similar lines to what I posted below and they were sidestepped. So I don’t think it’s an entirely fair characterisation of certain posters in my opinion.

BT could’ve urged caution to the litigation but he didn’t

He could have avoided comments around market cap but he didn’t

He could’ve avoided comments about fair value for the lifetime of the patents in all jurisdictions but he didn’t

He could’ve made sure that there was an intraday RNS to clarify the morning ‘settlement’ RNS but he didn’t

He could’ve requested shares supsended but he didn’t

The thing that’s kept me invested is the fact that I’ve accepted that what we as shareholders saw of the whole event is perhaps, at best, a 20% airbrushed version of all that went on there.

But I think it’s fairly obvious what the market thinks of our current CEO and there’s a lot of bridge building to ensure trust returns once more. I’m annoyed at the lack of anything resembling contrition or acknowledgement that things got overblown. I’m reminded of another company I invested in Open Orphan (now Hvivo) where the CEO (also Irish) promised the world and burned a few who got carried away.

I think nano is now positioned really well for growth. Link to a major will absolutely supercharge interest. But I absolutely get all the frustration and anger, and the depressed SP to boot.

Here’s a question: who put the NEDs there?

I think that an update next week is not an unreasonable expectation regarding capital return.

That and rumours emanating off a device tear down, as Nanonano has alluded to, could make next week very interesting.

I think there could be volatility.

Couldn’t agree more Lord.

I work at a small institution. We spent 9k on a website revamp. Got a camera crew in, a drone etc. you should see the website they produced for that money!

Give us the divi. Long suffering holders don’t want to see their gains wiped out by traders playing a buy back like a fiddle, which will inevitably happen as the company isn’t yet fully profitable.

I’d rather crystallise a gain and sit on a paper loss awaiting the next chapter.

…plus my holding is in an ISA haha

Why a holding RNS like this? They’ve had months to think about how the money will be shared to create value for investors so why not get on and tell us how it’s going to work!

I think people are losing perspective around the volumes of the VR headset. Dare I say it, it’s not relevant to the near term price action.

Apple VR is going to market. A minnow like us being currently valued at cash, in APPLE’S supply chain? That is going to create a huge halo effect.

If it is sensors, this could be just the beginning of something huge.

But just briefly revisiting whether the VR headset will take off, you have to remember apple’s strategy has never been ‘first to market’ but to release the best product that consumers actually want. They did the same with IPad and with Apple Watch.

Now these are all big ifs but IF our sensors are in this headset, expect a huge paradigm shift in terms of both sentiment and SP, regardless of volumes of headsets sold.

There are question marks around VR, they are still considered, in the mainstream at least, a bit of a novelty. I remember the same being said about keypad-less phones prior to the I phone. They were really frustrating to use and didn’t register touch reliably etc. Apple changed the game there. This could change the game again. And the USP? The tech that could really transform the VR experience? Superior eye tracking. And if rumour is to be believed, Nano is right at the heart of that USP.

Could be huge. But I remain cautious for now.

As with any disruptive or revolutionary tech the take up time for wide adoption is often surprisingly long. Weaning companies off well oiled supply lines to try something new is no easy task.

With sensors the age of the QD may be upon us. The full scale of their usability is not yet known. The potential is colossal. But Nano won’t enjoy a monopoly and will need to continue to make space for RandD and be poised to exploit opportunities and growth when they arrive. This is why the quality of the board must stand up to scrutiny and why many are cautious of the path ahead when taking into account the previous 12 months

In 3 trading days approx 45 million shares have changed hands and the price has shifted upwards marginally, and no TR1…does that not strike you as odd?

6 mil shares today. It’s surprising to see such volume vs fairly modest price action. Buyers and sellers locking horns.

In virtually every RNS the litigation is cited as creating ‘value’ for investors. This must be understood in the context of the SP at the time.

If you think creating value is cratering the SP from 40 to 20 then good luck to you.

I’m over what happened during the litigation and like you I am positive about the future. I for one got carried away by the litigation and I accept that. But I take everything tenner says with a heap of salt from here on in.

Do you not see the logic in me trying to temper some of the hype here and prevent a ‘litigation mark 2’? You can’t on one hand say ‘poor PIs getting carried away’ and then yourself perpetuate (as yet) rumours about who the end customer for the STM contract might be. It’s one and the same!

Daz, many holders went off Brian Tenner’s words, not some share magazine that I don’t recall reading.

It was the CEO who was talking about how the litigation would lead to inflection points etc. I’m not going to dredge over old ground here but as part of any DD you should be looking at those investor presentations and what he actually said.

I share your enthusiasm for the future, and it’s genuinely nice to see new holders that aren’t burdened with the baggage of the past, but you really ‘needed to be there’ to understand the way the company chimed in and played on the narrative of a big settlement. There’s no way they would’ve had an oversubscribed raise at 35p if they didn’t.

So some knowledge of the past is worth keeping in mind, and I would tread carefully trying to characterise holders who bought on the litigation as rainbow chasers because the story then was very different to what we know now.

Repetition not religion

Inclined to agree with NGR. There’s a difference between sharing research and just cheerleading the share a few times a day. Your facts are correct but the frequency of religion makes it feel pumpy. Let’s just wait and see what materialises.