Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

It's certainly good advice not to state things as fact when they are just suspicions or assumptions, but we are talking about Nanoco, so we don't know the facts and probably never will. We do know that one side is paying for a building though, so we can infer from that unusual fact that the other side must also be getting a substantial win in return. We can speculate that the company is very likely seeking a technological advantage over it's rivals, and from MEs comments the product is probably components for sensors in a LIDAR device. It is not unreasonable to suspect that the leading innovator and biggest manufacturer of LIDAR, Velodyne, is the partner. If they are paying for the building, perhaps we should sensibly expect them to include clauses in the contract to prevent their rivals benefiting from it.

Hi ddubya. My main point was to try to establish more precisely what we actually know about the material involved in the new deal, in challenge to an earlier unsubstantiated statement about QDs. I was trying to have fun riffing off your "smoke and mirrors" comment to poke fun at the general mystery surrounding the subject, but I was silly to suggest magic was involved: it's obviously alchemy. Your point about infrared materials generally being an imminent area for commercialisation is interesting, but do we have anything more than ME's passing comment to go on? I think I read somewhere that the sensor market is becoming a hotbed of competition in the US, which perhaps adds fuel to the flames. Our ability to accept orders in this field may be hampered by the fact that our upcoming manufacturing building dedicated to producing infrared materials is paid for by one player?

Just because ME talks about a range of infrared materials "starting to take off", no need to portray him as some sort of magician working with smoke and mirrors, although I suppose he did pull a rabbit out of a hat with the latest deal. Mystic Mike the Infrared Illusionist? The point I was making is that we don't know that the material is not quantum dots merely from the use of the term "novel nanoparticles". My understanding is that scientists generally use the word novel to signify that a nanomaterial has unique properties which are not present at bigger scales, so the term would only exclude those humdrum nanomaterials which behave the same as their related bulk materials, which quantum dots certainly don't. All we really know is that it's infrared nanomaterial in the area of advanced sensors for detecting proximity. So pick a novel nanomaterial, any novel nanomaterial ... don't show me it, and put it back in the deck. Now, was it, um, sorry, I can't detect it.

Drop actually started in mid-March and has been about 2 pounds so far. Don't see any connection with the dividend or with the underlying business, this is surely down to Trump's "good" trade war, which has affected the whole market, but particularly companies exposed to China/Asia.

"we know the new nano material is not quantum dots but a novel material" Not exactly. All we know is what has actually been said: "novel nano-particles for advanced electronic devices " " infrared materials which can be deployed in a range of technologies including advanced sensors, has started to take off. Last month we announced a major new contract in that area." "If you look at all the sensors, proximity sensors, that are used in automobiles to locate what�s around you, you look at autonomous vehicles and their need to understand what�s around them, these are the areas where these types of sensors are used and our materials work in that area to help improve performance." None of these statements specifically rule out quantum dots, and as I said before, scientists tend to use the word "novel" to mean something other than "new", so assuming a standard meaning for this word is unwise. Having said that, the statements point to material that would be used in an IR proximity device, probably LIDAR. Quantum dots have been used in sensors, but I'm not sure about proximity sensors. ME's comments could possibly be interpreted to mean the material has some secondary role rather than as the main sensor, since it is for "improving performance"?

Nice idea, blunders, but perhaps we should be cautious about reading too much into a new patent? Most patents don't result in anything being produced, and even if they do, it's usually for something in the future rather than an order from the past! What it might be though, is an indicator that Nanoco may have changed their minds about divesting solar? If not, you'd perhaps expect them to be directing their research and patenting efforts in other directions? Officially they've been trying to divest solar since August.

"10,000 sq ft is a considerable size for an expansion as it is actually doubling the size of Nanoco." Yes, they neglected to mention that rather pertinent fact in the press release too, but at least that has now been clarified, thanks to NW. I think you are rather muddying the waters again though: it's not doubling the size of Nanoco itself, just the space occupied at the Runcorn facility. The expansions are twofold: the one just clarified as from the original 3K to current 10K is interesting in that it gives a rough indication of the quite considerable growth which has been necessary to satisfy orders primarily from the display industry. The second expansion, the forthcoming doubling of size, we already "knew" about from MEs interview, and it is presumably all dedicated to manufacturing for the new deal, as they are paying for it. My understanding is that the original building at Runcorn was designed as a proof of concept for the seeding process in order to demonstrate it to potential licencees, it was not intended to be a manufacturing site. The real story here is surely it's transformation from a cost centre into a substantial source of revenue, and the subsequent de facto modification of Nanoco's business model from licensing.

"How often do you expect the share price to go up? Every decade, Every year,Every week,Every day, or Every hour?" Looking at the five year graph, we should expect it about once per year?

Shame they didn't issue a clear press release in the first place, but good to have clarification. So the actual growth at Runcorn has been 3K>10K>20K as we suspected. That's a much more dramatic story than the confusing press release gets across. What a shame it's impact was deadened for most readers who probably just took away the figures mentioned: 3K ft and 10K ft. The release seems to achieve what was intended - a story of growth, but in a mediocre and lacklustre way. Anyway Tom, nice to hear about your interest in the share price stagnation. The good news is, today, currently, NO CHANGE! Yes, it's not down today so far! Beating the FTSE all share index! We are all winners.

M&G are being merged with Prudential UK+Europe, ahead of a split of Prudential into two separate listed companies scheduled for late next year/ early 2020. Not sure if it will have any impact on TEF deals, but it could potentially give M&G more flexibility and autonomy in the medium term.

Your interpretation seems the most likely explanation Mars1. It assumes that the current size is 10K ft, not just the original 3K mentioned in the press release. If so, it seems slightly odd that they have been quietly cobbling an extra 7K of space onto the original purpose designed building without any fanfare, in marked contrast to this press release. It would also imply that the new space will possibly be somewhat tidier and better arranged than the existing area. It would be sensible to clarify and reconcile the press release with ME's comment of "doubling", and the interim results would be the perfect opportunity to do so. I mean, it's not like Nanoco to keep us guessing.

I was wrong about the headlines, but what I was getting at is the title of the thread. Given the story has already been posted here, it seemed strange to see it appear again from a slanted angle. The difference in the articles is not difficult to spot, it can be seen in the very first words "Researchers in Austria", compared to "An international research team ", which again seems like an odd shift of emphasis, although I agree the content is virtually identical.

rc30 posted a version of this story a week ago, where the credit was given to researchers in Austria. Seems to have been slightly rewritten to give Manchester the leading role and headline. Needless to say, it was a collaboration, but seems pretty clear that the main work was done in Austria. Here's the original again (thanks rc30): https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/research-news/tuneable-quantum-dots-ride-graphene-bn-2018-03/

There are strong rumours that Jong-Un secretly visited Beijing yesterday (to stock up on hair product?). Don't forget a UK interest rate rise is coming too: there are plenty of reasons for short term movements.

I see what you mean gold5: the value of your existing holding will be split equally across the two new companies, so yes, that is a 50/50 split of your assets. I thought you were referring to the split of the company itself, which obviously doesn't divide up so neatly! The change is still some way off: late next year, or early 2020. When it happens you can sell your newly issued "Pru UK & Europe" and do whatever you want with the proceeds, perhaps add them to your new holding in "Pru Asia and US". It's important to understand that if you do this then you are actively increasing your exposure to Asian markets rather than maintaining them at the current level, and that this is optional. Doing nothing would mean you have the same exposure as you have now, which is a mix of Asia, US, UK and Europe (and a little bit of India, Africa, etc.). Apologies if I'm being pedantic, just trying to be crystal clear! (:

The so-called "example" given for horticulture is untrue, as has been pointed out more than once. A reasonable refinement would be to listen to the radio program you derived this from and withdraw, or at the very least qualify your claim by admitting that: 1. QDs are not mentioned at all, not even once, their involvement is pure assumption on your part, rather than fact; 2. The application was seed production for genetic research, not crop production. The Medicine section could be updated to include the " photodynamic therapy" which ME mentioned in the interview: "light therapy being used, to help improve blood circulation which helps reduce swelling and improve healing times."

One other thing: it isn't a 50/50 split, it's separating UK&Europe from the rest, so the resulting companies will not be identical sizes.

The split doesn't reduce exposure to Asia in any way whatsoever, it will be identical before and after the split, just separated. Anyone who has invested in Pru to take advantage of the Asian market should be delighted with the split, since it will give them the option to divest their interest in the non-Asian part of the business, if they wish to. Also, it will result in a dedicated management team focused exclusively on Asia (and America), which should please such investors even more.

"Quantum wells are the basis of Quantum Dots and other Nanotechnology" That's a very odd statement. Are you sure, because the link you provided says no such thing, and neither does the wiki entry for quantum dots. They both sound like different structures fabricated in different ways. Do you have another source for this claim?

"QD sensors" doesn't sound quite right, we should probably be thinking along the lines of "some unknown nanomaterial which would fit in an IR proximity sensor", but the thought of another material jumping from Nanoco's lab to the marketplace is certainly confidence building, you have to wonder how many others are close to fruition after years of small incremental improvements.