Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

He sold 1.65m in December, so buying 50k is a small bet. Still might be a good indicator though: he sold high, bought low?

Thanks BeContrarian. While I'm hard headed about the limitations of the win, it's worth saying that this little company has been through hell and survived. It took on a vicious gangster in Samsung, and is beating them soundly. It would be a fool who underestimates them, they just need to catch a break and get that first big licensing deal the technology deserves.

Thanks NGR1616. Settlement makes absolute sense for both sides now, but I have zero faith in Samsung's good sense, they are simple minded criminals, imo.

The robust, good humoured defense of the patents was a joy to behold, regardless of financial considerations - this is brilliant science. Nigel Pickett's reputation goes up another notch, and let's hope his inventions finally bridge the narrow gap to commercial success.

The PTAB win is of significant, but limited financial value. We haven't won any new business. Financially it means a chance (not a guarantee) of obtaining a large, unspecified one-off payment. It also raises the possibility (not a guarantee) that Samsung may be forced to reluctantly buy a license (if it makes financial sense for them to continue using the technology). It is perhaps understandable that the SP "only" moved up 30% at this stage - a healthy business needs to generate recurring revenue, and that's where the focus should be.

Tenner's messaging has been a big improvement on the previous guy, good guidance during the PTAB process, so his cautious optimism over non-display business is encouraging, it will be interesting to watch out for anything he has to say about the display business.

Success in court relieves an existential threat, but it doesn't necessarily fix the revenue problem. Nanoco need to sell stuff on it's merits, rather than just recovering stolen property. We've been hoping for high volume licenses in display for years. Despite the likelihood of a handy lump sum, patent validity alone really only restores us back to where we were in terms of recurring revenue, i.e. very little. However, the SP may well drift up from here, not down, as we countdown to a sparklingly positive court case offering a mystery prize, likely bigger than anything the company has ever seen before. Alternatively, an out of court deal with Samsung, the sort of deal Nanoco proposed in the first place, could be the kickstart to a thriving business. The perfect scenario, though, would be doing a deal with one of Samsung's rivals, signed on the day they are hit with maximum damages in court

Assuming success in the trial is now just a matter of time, what are the ongoing prospects for licensing? Was cost the main reason Samsung decided to "appropriate" the technology? No one else has yet been willing to pay for it either, and when Nanoco was up for sale no-one bought them, suggesting the technology is not regarded as irresistibly valuable. Confirmation of patent validity certainly increases value, but probably not from a screen makers perspective. Should we expect more pragmatic pricing from Nanoco, or perhaps a withdrawal from the market by Samsung?

Thanks for gracious apology Nanogeddon, last night's excitement was understandable after months of anticipation. Looks like we're up 40% on day 1 anyway, not too shabby for the Runcorn dotcrankers

"BlahBlahDoh ******! We have slated BTB on this board, but I have never heard such utter cararp!"

Really Nanogeddon? Just for making a guess when asked? I like to think I'm a little more "mainstream" than BTB, but anyone slating him should appreciate his "avant garde" opinions, because they provoke thoughtful responses.

Well, my guess at around 40p is a lot less "cararp" than your various numbers from 80p upwards, isn't it?
Even if my guess had been wrong, the reason given (remaining uncertainties) was a perfectly valid one, and didn't deserve a pointless insult. When Nanoco overcomes another hurdle (the appeal, the trial, the trial appeal) or reaches a settlement, the price will undoubtedly go up some more, but we're not quite there yet (stop asking).

After today, I can see the SP drifting higher. Samsung's challenge now looks like we all thought it was from the beginning: an excuse for timewasting, and the appeal even more so - utterly frivolous. When it comes to the trial, it's probably now just a case of deciding how much, then batting away another flimsy appeal. Then we need to work out whether a licensing agreement can be made with the people who thieved from us, or maybe someone else, or both! Plenty of opportunities for the SP to keep rising over the next year or two, or ten

When the Apple contracts were in play the SP only rose to around 50p. While we now have a massively increased prospect of substantial income and profitability, there are still a lot of things which need to happen before it is realised. The market should price in remaining uncertainties, so I'd guess the price MIGHT settle somewhere near 40p for now? Market isn't rational of course, anything is possible, hold on to your hat.

Who's the Quantum Dot Daddy, Sadsong? Five nil, you muppets!

Well done all for hanging on. Thanks to the legal team and backers. Our collective view of the proceedings seems to have been proven accurate. Samsung's line of argument was stilted, twisted, and unconvincing from the start, and it's hard to view them as anything but criminals trying it on. Long way to go, but a good chance now of making them pay. Confirmation that Nanoco own valid patents should alone raise the share price, and the case against Samsung is now immensely, almost insurmountably strong,

li-quid buy-upsy?

The pound declining against African currencies should, in theory, make the SP should go up, as local currency earnings are worth more pounds, whereas if African currencies depreciate against the dollar it might tend to go down, as the cost of paying dollar dividends is more expensive, so maybe they kind of cancel each other out? But then, most UK holders presumably have their dividends converted from dollars into pounds, so that's another exchange rate to factor in. Complicated, innit?

Wow, just bounced off $30, what a ridiculous overreaction!

Couple of weeks ago, when these were around $43, Motley Fool was recommending them, saying "ridiculously undervalued, with a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of around 1 and a price-to-book ratio of just 0.37"

What's two levels below ridiculously undervalued? Mentally deranged mispricing?

The most encouraging thing in the results is that subscriber numbers have actually increased, despite the strict imposition of SIM registration in Nigeria during the year. On top of that, mobile money has grown strongly, the average amount people are spending is growing, and even margins are going up 'marginally' (: All of these point to even bigger revenues and profits next time, although the greedy market seems to think they should have come earlier. Compared to most shares, this one has held up well this year, and I'd be surprised if it doesn't recover swiftly on prospects.

Thanks Tom. Yield about 1.6% almost qualifies as a medium crumb? If Pru holders were suffering two weeks ago, they must be numb to the pain by now! Assuming the war won't last forever, and demographics will, it's starting to look historically cheap and possibly vulnerable to a takeover?

Hong Kong's new leader was appointed by Beijing in a fake election where there was only one candidate, a secret vote, and voters selected for loyalty to emperor Xi. What a joke China is: a ridiculously dishonest and childish procedure whose only purpose was to make clumsy Pooh Bear feel better. Hard to see how any company can succeed in such an ugly, nasty, corrupt environment, employees must have to constantly hold their noses (and their tongues).

As I understand it, the reinvestment of dividends is done the MORNING AFTER payment date, so it is not done at a specific closing price. As TheClive said, it may be averaged over several purchases at different prices. Therefore, the date of purchase you asked for would be 29th April, but this wouldn't help you determine the exact (average) price, you'd have to wait until they calculated it.

"I hope CF has learned some lessons for once"
His reason for spinning off was a comparison with another company who had done it with spectacular success. He seemed to be confusing the process with the product? It's still early doors, but POLB has so far failed to prove it is a viable standalone business. If it isn't, the spinoff was simply a waste of time and money. It begs the question, why was this chosen, out of the blue? Did more obvious candidates, such as the stupidly-named DIM, have even poorer prospects?

The main difference in BTB's interpretation of the facts and everyone elses, is that he thinks the worst possible outcome is the most likely one. It's an unreasonable position, but not an impossible one, therefore he has a perfect right to hold it

Appreciate BTBs pessimistic musings: they prompt the board to continually assess the validity of assumptions and provoke healthy debate. Right or wrong, it's a valuable contribution. We can't assume a PTAB win, a settlement, or a contract for materials, all we can do is make a best guess. My guess is that the company is in a more promising position now than it has been since it lost the Apple gig. It's no longer a binary bet on the court decision, and the management are straight talkers.