Member Info for BeContrarian

Totally agree they will be a non event.

However, disagree on your forecasted impact on the SP.I think the default setting for the last 12 months has been poor results/earnings and that was priced in a long time ago. All the money coming in since around 10p has been markman money IMO.

I should imagine most people will see positive results as a bonus rather than an expectation. To be honest, it’s a bit daft to point out there’s no revenue stream given the nature of the discussions that have dominated this board. Pretty hard to turn a profit when a colossus of electronics has nicked your IP which also happened to be your flagship product.

I don’t expect any official word from nano on the trial any time soon. But the SP will talk. The courts are ultimately a public forum and vested interests will be there, weighing and measuring every word spoken. The SP may well do nothing, or it could tell you what went down in that courtroom better than any RNS could... we will just have to wait and see.

There are so many fronts on which the SP could fly it’s verging on ridiculous.

Have topped up

A great article for anyone looking for an introduction as to what Orph are all about. Thanks for sharing.

To the many strings of Orph’s bow I’d add CF. A man with a clear vision for this company, has plenty of his own skin in the game and seems to be forever three steps ahead. Of all my holdings he is far and away the most impressive CEO. Anyone who holds Tesla (love him or loathe him!) will tell you that having a visionary and proactive CEO, such as we have here, can in itself be a massive boost for the SP.

Really encouraging reading Amerloque, thanks.

I agree that the roulette wheel has been spinning a while now. But if you’re in anywhere between the 5-30p range you stand to do far more than double your money if this goes our way.

1) you must have a very short memory!!

I quote:
“If your primary reason for investing in Nanoco, or any other AIM company, is what MIGHT come about if there were to be a successful conclusion resulting from highly contentious legal action (if it ever actually gets further than a hearing that is) ...then I wish you luck. Because there is a very good chance it will never happen” Scampthedog - 4/3/21

2) you have repeatedly stated that Nano, in its current state, without a positive RNS, new product etc etc is not really a viable investment. Hence, washed up.

I don’t see what good is coming from all this bickering really. You’ve got your rise I suppose. I feel embarrassed having engaged with it but the hypocrisy of your statements needed addressing.

A little window into Scampthedog's mind:

Today:
"Will be buying more when (if) it returns to sensible levels."

8th March:
"Correct, frostbar12. I have a very small investment here at this moment.
But until another upbeat, positive RNS is announced from this company concerning a new customer, finances or an update pertaining to new or existing tech then I WON'T BE BUYING ANY MORE STOCK."

Which one is it Scamthedog?

Let me give you my own take. You are absolutely bought in to the idea of something good coming out of this trial but deliberately talk it down to add to your position. The chances of success or failure in court are an unknown. It is up to each individual to make up their own mind about Nano's chances and position themselves accordingly. I don't know exactly what a 'half decent chance' is or precisely how that reflects in a SP, I also find it curious that you care what happens on the grapevine '24 hours before the rest of us'. You've already told us Nano are washed up so why the FOMO?

A shame really. Some really constructive and interesting discussion undermined by a troll.

Here he is!

Haven’t sold a single share. Don’t intend to.

What is a ‘sensible level’ exactly?

Also I’m sure you said you didn’t fancy nano’s chances on tne legal front so why are you interested in this board at the minute? Wait for the inevitable doom and hoover up your 5p shares Derampthedog

I would be surprised if Markman was met with radio silence until the official verdict a month later. Something will leak or there may well be an evaluation from Nanoco about how they felt it went. Failing that, I’m sure the SP will tell us all we need to know as some insiders will definitely know what went down.

Regarding chicanery relating to Samsung’s attempts down the IPR route I suspect this will be blocked owing to the fact that there’s already the whole markman proceedings well underway. Surely the two cannot run simultaneously?

Judge Gilstrap is likely to take a very dim view of all this before a word has been spoken.

This board has had a healthy discussion on this topic but right now this is feeling like a slam dunk. Maybe not at markman but certainly if it went to trial.

For the sake of avoiding ‘confirmation bias’ has anyone been to the other side to see what potential defence is being discussed?

Cheers, BC

BTB as has been discussed before, the Markman is going to be pivotal in the context of this case. It’s a proxy trial in which a judge examines evidence that would be put before a jury to see if both parties meet the bar in terms of a comprehensible and sound case. Namely, if the patents are sound on Nano’s side and if Samsung have a reasonable reply to infringements on their side.

If the judge spots serious deficiencies in one or the other party then it’s called as such there and then, thus preventing a potential waste of money all round taking it to trial by jury.

Given this, the markman, to my eyes at least, seems absolutely critical to how this pans out from here.

Don’t think many are expecting an early settlement BTB. As foolish a strategy as it is, delay and hedge and just hope in the mean time some new argument or evidence miraculously materialises seems to be Samsung’s play here.

If markman doesn’t go Samsung’s way then going to trial will be absolute madness. These documents seem to suggest they will go all the way. In light of Solas, Einstein’s words seem very apt:

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Hi Frostbar, it’s a small company which is thinly traded. A couple of busier days with some big buys (as we’ve seen) can knock the share price about quite violently. I’m happy to be wrong on this one but I don’t see what else it could be other than volatile trading.

I’m almost certain this is pure sentiment/people cottoning on to Nano’s story.

I personally think that the chance of a positive outcome and/or a potential buyout is still not priced in. The upside potential here is what’s attracting the punters.

1.5 mil and it’s only 11am... definitely much more lively than we’ve seen in a while...

Haven’t heard much from our 4-legged friend since discussing his bizarre investment rationale haha

Apologies, patent infringement

One more little detail from the solas case.

Where copyright infringement is known/intentional, the judge can decide to increase the amount that is awarded up to TRIPLE the original settlement figure.

So, Samsung is playing a dangerous game by adopting the same strategy with nano and I strongly suspect that if markman doesn’t go their way they will look to settle without this going to trial.

Well, if you think like Samsung,

Why waste millions on R and D trying to find a new process when you can just rip off Nano’s method and get away with it?

An interesting point on the nature of the defence ddubya.

Off the back of that, I did a bit of digging on the solas case to look for parallels in Samsung’s approach.

It’s interesting that in both, Samsung are quite brazen in their admittance to using the patents, instead focusing their energies on dismantling the vailidity of the patents themselves. Knowing that the same judge is involved here as with solas, it will no doubt be a ploy he is already familiar with.

The tone of some of this correspondence from Samsung...wow
https://www.docketbird.com/court-documents/Solas-Oled-Ltd-v-Samsung-Display-Co-Ltd-et-al/Exhibit-2/txed-2:2019-cv-00152-00117-002