Member Info for BeContrarian

It’s great to hear mediation is taking place. I should imagine it’s quite a guarded and testy affair at this early stage and will take the pre trial conference to really understand one another’s position.

It would surprise me if there was any traction before then.

I’m amazed the price has held up as well as it has. Now he’s below threshold I expect he plans to fully exit his position.

I agree with that assessment nanonano.

The cynic in me is wondering if Samsung set up a shell company (Nanosys) and will claim in court that ‘well it’s not our fault we didn’t know, we just went to Nanosys and they said they could do the dots cheaper so we went with them’. I know this sounds like conspiracy talk but could muddy the waters a bit in court?

Because it’s a shell company, and the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Just a couple of highlights from the website:

Claims it’s QDs are ‘ubiquitous’ but doesn’t mention a single firm with which it is partnered.
Brags of an extensive patent portfolio and lists a massive bunch of patents, but does not specify which aspect of their QD or MicroLED products/processes are patented.
Under the ‘science’ tab, gives some funky stats on how big a QD is and some cool drawings but again, no reference to which aspects of the tech it has cornered via its patents.
Randomly throws in that Samsung is investing billions in QD but curiously no mention of their relationship or how that’s in any way relevant to Nanosys.

Whole set up is shady if you ask me.

As we approach the ticker tape of the marathon race, a bit of fatigue and frayed tempers are, I guess, inevitable.

Hawi and Feeks you are both valued contributors to this board. Both of which I hope to share a beer with when this is over. I say let’s draw a line under it and look forward to news.

It’s genuinely difficult to assess the situation right now because there are just so many variables in play. Let’s remove the commercial aspect for now:

Lower end damages, minus a high % cut for our legal funders, based on something that could yet take a few months, and is not guaranteed, and there is a strong argument that the current SP is overpriced.

A global out of court settlement, factoring in both an initial compensation payment followed by a licensing agreement, and the current SP looks like bargain of the century.

So I do see Nigwitty’s point that a default position of caution is certainly prudent. Especially considering that until something is proven or signed, there is still the outlier risk of legal proceedings going against us. But I also see why this is causing such heated debate. We are all looking at the prospects on different points of the same very wide spectrum.

For my own part I still continue to lean strongly on settlement. Samsung will know full well that even if they get hit with a massive damage award that they will of course be able to pay, this is just going to be the first in a very long and widespread legal crusade against them.

Feeks I always thought visibility meant ‘you are going to see some hard numbers in terms of order value’. And of course, that sort of detail wouldn’t be released unless there was an actual order.

I don’t see how one achieves production visibility without servicing an actual order?!

Having read the docket it’s clear to me Samsung are chancing their arm at trying to request a ‘revision through the back door’ of the PTAB findings.

I expect Samsung’s claim to not only be rejected, but to also get a telling off in the ruling to boot.

I see all this as a positive. This is the level at which Samsung are having to operate because they don’t actually have any legitimate arguments.

Not long now.

I think it’s a fair assumption given you’re posting on the Nano board and not explicitly disclaiming otherwise!

Besides, the suggestion that an entire market ie speculative and ‘gambling’ takes leave of the facts on my view. Granted there are a lot of miners which are by and large risky, there are also some very well established titans of aim that would give many a FTSE company a run for their money.

Anyway I’m not looking for a fight here we all want a good outcome.

Sigh. As daft as that comment is, troublesome, Nano aren’t on AIM.

I don’t presume to speak for others but for me, I love hearing other people’s views and chewing over ideas collaboratively, this can be said of 99% of contributors.
I think where Nigwitty comes unstuck is that he’s a one man echo chamber: very uninterested, even disdainful of the opinions of others. Which makes me wonder what would attract said user to such a space as this?

Feel pretty certain that the supply chain will be gone after in the event of positive court award.

This, and being pursued in other territories, is what makes this very hazardous for Samsung. Settlement is the only route that draws a line under it all, and is odds on IMO.

That username made me laugh 7shares!

I gather real time transcription is only really needed for depositions etc. for a live trial I don’t see what material advantage it offers? I’m guessing all the counsel needed will be in that courtroom…

‘Usually this chat blows up on any change in share price‘

Really?!

way I think that a buyout is nothing to worry about. It will either be fair value for all concerned of friendly, and any attempt at a hostile will be sniffed out quite quickly IMO

The buyout ship sailed a year ago IMO. They had plenty of opportunities to scoop this up for around the current MCap back in the 10p days but showed no inclination to.

Either w

I still can’t fully get my head around what actually happened, I’m inclined to agree with Nigwitty that it was an agreed off book trade between Loam and the new VC.
I think it’s important to bear in mind that this was all done in an orderly way. LOAM aren’t desperate to get rid, they aren’t tanking the price by dumping boat loads of stock and I think if there wasn’t a suitable buyer, as was found here, then they would’ve simply held on.
Just normal market mechanics really. And overall the introduction of a new player who is clearly bullish is no bad thing.

Well whatever it is, the market clearly doesn’t think it’s Turcan getting rid of 5 mil shares…