Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

" Isn't that what Italy did with the Lira in the 80's?"

No it isn't. What China did in the '80s might be a better match? Nigeria had a complicated dual value system which kept the currency artificially high. Removing that system allowed the currency to find it's "real" market value and hopefully makes business simpler and more predictable. That's why the company has welcomed it. I don't think Italy did devalue anyway (?), the lira was just very weak and had been since the war. Also, Italy boomed in the '80s - in 1987 their economy was bigger than the UK.

Apparently the new accounting rules change the timing of profit recognition.

It's curious that implementing them sends 2022 profits in opposite directions for Pru and M&G:

down $653m and up £552m respectively (adjusted operating profit).

BTs sustained guidance about trial prospects has a cognitive dissonance with the outcome. You'd have to be dishonest or wilfully blind not to recognize that. But beyond that there is also the companies business model, which predates BTs arrival. The settlement totally undermines it. Claiming a settlement which mocks and devalues licensing is "fair value" is an insult to the intelligence.

Yes, specifically it's for funding a Long Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) where employees get bonuses for reaching specific targets which are supposed to enhance shareholder value. It's a good idea in principle, but shareholders usually have no say in what the targets are, and the main benefits tend to go to the people setting up such schemes.

Some might question why about £3.5m is being set aside now when the company is still estimated to be about 3 years (?) away from breaking even. Shouldn't such bonuses be paid for out of profits, not fundraising?

Another dilution, almost 3%.

"To be held by the Company's Employee Benefit Trust ("EBT") and will be used to satisfy LTIP awards."

If uncertainty over exchange rates were the main issue, people would surely be buying, because any uncertainty has been eliminated? The time to sell would have been before the devaluation, not after? The naira is now probably close to true market rates rather than some contorted artificial value - it is likely to continue to devalue, as it always has, but relatively slowly. As the company itself has said, this policy of realistic, unified exchange rates is ultimately good for business. It is arguably good for the Nigerian economy generally, despite the short term pain, because it is highly likely to attract foreign investment to Nigeria, boosting confidence, jobs, spending and tax revenue, and maybe infrastructure too - particularly in the oil sector. IF this happens, the short term reduction in the value of revenue (in dollar terms) should be more than offset by an increase in the speed of growth? There are other factors at play here, but selling due to a currency correction seems muddleheaded? Don't invest in Africa expecting stability or consistency from governments!

A bit of googling reveals Moderna have been working on a hMPV vaccine for a while now.

In order to use Mo's "process of elimination" though, we'd need to know all the other possible candidates, and what the criteria is for eliminating any of them. I've done all the hard work, now can someone else fill in those minor details?

"The company said a 1% devaluation of the naira would hit its revenue by USD22 million"

So the approx. 40% devaluation over the past month has wiped about $880m of revenue.

Last year revenue was $5,260m, so devaluation equates to about 16.7% of revenue so far.

Hopefully the devaluation and other measures will bring stability going forward, and sustained growth from a lower base?

It's surprising how many here are confident that new orders are just around the corner, based on management guidance. They have been saying that for at least six years, as LTHs will know. Orders are always a possibility, as the Apple contracts proved, but management guidance simply cannot be trusted, as experience also proves.

The March RNS merely states "first results expected in H1 2023."

That means the project may have produced something by then, but it may not. It was just an expectation, not a deadline. It doesn't say anything about announcements of results - if the first results were negative, for example, there could well be silence pending another try. Any results will presumably need to be analysed before any potential press release, and like Moany says, they could then be held back for publicity purposes. Don't hold your breath

Sage hit a 23 year high today, after an upgrade by JP Morgan.

The highest ever closing price was £9.3074 in Feb 2000, but there was a 77 for 81 consolidation in 2013, which made the SP artificially higher thereafter. Adjusting for that makes the equivalent all time high about £9.79

" I foresee it dramatically increasing the number of patients able to benefit from this advanced energy, not only here in Nottingham but at healthcare settings elsewhere across Europe"

That's the doctors prognosis. But why just Europe? It's surely significant that this successful application happened almost immediately after approval. It's effectively opening the gate on a new revenue stream. The market seems more than ready for these products. The training process is in place too. Seems like it is all coming together at last. This should logically translate into increasing revenue and a SP run up to the next trading update.

Why buy the product, when you can steal the IP, use it for a few years, pay a speeding ticket and get some extra IP as a bonus? Viable companies sell contracts, not IP. When Nano actually signs some contracts, rather than promises, they'll become "viable".

Does Tinubu have a heart of darkness, or one dancing to an Afrobeat?

Short term, he's been a pain in the Naira

That estimated global revenues number is not definitive, Theorist, some estimates are lower, but Intuitive are certainly dominant. It's worth noting that the robot market includes all areas of the body, whereas CREOs tools are targeted at specific, but important, areas. Looks like a good appointment today, another sign of ambition and progress

Even the company itself gave up on horticulture when LED technology advanced. Why do punters still imagine that nanotechnology has anything to offer in this area? LEDs have become cheap, effective and tunable. What value does nanotechnology add? There is zero evidence that it can improve yields or reduce costs, so what else is there that dreamers think it can do to turn a profit in this market? What do they see that the company doesn't? Is there a single vertical/indoor farmer who now use anything other than LEDs?

There are no doubt many applications for nanomaterials, but let's be realistic about which ones are viable, and also about the potential revenue from any of them - years of experience have demonstrated that it is far less than previously hoped for.

Intuitive reported revenue of $6.431B last year. Estimated global market for surgical robots was $8.5B. That works out at 75.7% share of total revenue - extremely impressive, although substantially less than "over 90%" in terms of revenue.

If they are interested in taking over CREO, they have shown no sign of it so far - not participating in the fundraising, for example - but it should be noted that they are really just evaluating the usage of CREOs tools at the moment, if they like them for any specific application then the uptake could be swift and dramatic. Also, although huge, they are not the only big player in this area, and there is at least one smaller, nimbler rival who also have a contract with CREO, which could lead to big European sales. On top of that, the global market is predicted to more than double over the next four years.

Some good reasons to be positive on this stock, with the usual cautions and awareness of recent CREO history and disappointments.

Long term holders have been shafted by misjudgement, of course. If they had fundraised when it was obviously needed, then the long SP decline and heavy dilution could have been substantially reduced. The fundraising issue was highlighted on this board long before it destroyed 90% of shareholder value: if we could see it, why couldn't the people who are paid to?

Hi 1eyedman

Before the fundraising in Feb, there were 180 million shares in issue, so at £2.20 the MCAP would have been approx £396m. That seems to demonstrate the potential for this to go much higher if the revenue numbers are pleasing.

Those who bought at 20p got an absolute steal!

I would have thought the obvious conclusion from the trial outcome is that the potential of Nanoco has been vastly overestimated and hyped. They not only conceded rights to the key display application for a tiny fraction of it's supposed value, they were also forced to sell off other IP for a very modest lump sum. Just one-off settlements - a dead end, not a business future. They didn't fight either of these sales, they welcomed them, giving a sobering lesson in the real world value of their offerings.