Member Info for bonzoful

Nanoco is a plc. He was appointed as CEO and spent its money. Some of us bought a share or two hundred thousand in the plc. No one owned 50% or more of the ahares. So noone can claim it was their money.

The tide has stopped going out at least: the current share price is underpinned by the payment due from Samsung next February being close to the value of the company.
I don't expect 61p again until that cash has been received, the first commercial order has been won and the first dividend declared declared. The company will then look a very attractive investment with lots of cash retained on its balance sheet and several large markets to sell into. I expect all three conditions to be in place by this time next year and empathise with those who have sold out.

8 to 9 customers mentioned in 2022 results presentation: 5 now. But materials in test with major TV brand; multiple validations expected by July 23; and expectation of production contract by end calender 23 unchanged.
When 2023 results published they will show a profit (from sale of intangible assets); cash in the bank and the prospect of a dividend in the early months of 2024. Those focussed on the Samsung litigation will have sold and moved on. And the prospects will once again look very good.

I will be interested to see, both now and in six months, the chart of how different products are proceeding through stages of development, wait for the returns to shareholders promised for next year then reassess.

An unwelcome distraction from the business of landing commercial contracts which offers no realistic prospect of compensation to shareholders. If some of those nominated with no previous connection to the company were elected to the Board I would expect the senior staff to move on. If it comes to a vote I shall vote against.

I would expect Apple to make an announcement rather than let the news leak out through supply chain contracts. Macrumors suggests launch of the AR/VR headset is currently expected in June (while acknowledging some think there is a chance it will be launched in the spring).

Nanonano
I share your views on ME but still retain faith in BT.
Heading for a jury trial he had to talk the settlement up. He did caution an out of court settlement would be lower. Most, if not all of us, including myself, did not appreciate by how much. I am hoping the settlement with Samsung is legally binding. If so having the cash in the bank, or legally enforcable, is invaluable for a company in Nanocos position. I dont expect much on March 28th, do have some hopes of a commercial order by July this year and expect a dividend of around 4p, possibly a bit more, by this time next year. At that point the published figures for Nanoco will begin to look good. And prospects of commercial orders for sensors, if not orders, should strengthen. I plan to hold till then before diversifying a little bit.
The lesson I have learned is that to get a return on my investment I have to trust the numbers. The rest is hope and stories which, it turns out, frequently come to nothing.

I thought Nanoco just sold a couple of patents for around £85m. Most on here were deeply disappointed. Up to them. But developing patents is what Nanoco do. And selling a couple for £millions is great. Its set them up for years. Time to see the day traders off and to focus on the organic business., in my view.

At current share price the MCap is £78m. Much the same as is due from Samsung, which will more than cover costs at current levels for 9 years. If Nanoco win orders of £16m a year, the profit should be £8m a year and a prospective P/E of 20 would give an MCap of £160m: twice the current level. Implying a share price around 48p. With a foothold in a growing market.
The first commercial order is unlikely to be £16m. But the chances of getting it appear good. And once one order is won the chances of others following appear better. Still speculative. But a much stonger position than previously. Happy to hold.

Nanoco expect, or expected, a commercial contract to be in place by July 2023. Even if it is small it is likely to put the company into profit. I hope we learn more when the interim are published on March 28.
Responsibility for sharing too much information about how to make CFQD surely rests with the then CEO, Michael Edelman, who moved on when Nanoco began the litigation against Samsung.

Any decent award by a jury would have been appealed by Samsung starting a process that would have taken years, with Nanoco receiving no cash meanwhile. Refinancing before 2025 would have been necessary and before then Nanoco would have been unattractive as a potential supplier.

Sustained automatic trades at the top end of the range today, suggesting an institutional buyer. Long may that continue.

The £6m a year to be charged to revenue for 9 years will help a lot.

£70m of revenue can be repeated as far as I an concerned. Rewards Nanocos research which is what they do.

Profitability is within reach

The revenue from sale of patents is to be treated as deferred income, with £3m treated as revenue in H2 2023 and £6m a year treated as revenue for 9 years. With costs currently running at £5m a year is within reach. The prospects for winning a commercial order appear good (though not certain). The disappointment has been huge. But one order will transform this into a profitable, dividend paying company with excellent prospects.

The RNS on the settlement quotes the Chairman as saying there was a firm intention to give shareholders a substantial return. Set aside the £54m they intend to charge to revenue over 9 years and there is around £36m to split between investing in further research and returning to shareholders, after the second payment from Samsung next February. I should think the large shareholders would encourage the Chairman to distribute the majority of it.

In two years time: the balance sheet will look healthy; revenue will match or exceed costs as some of £54m from Samsung is recognised as revenue each year; a dividend will have been paid to shareholders; and the demand for CFQDs for sensors will be growing. The shares are then likely to attract investors interested in the organic business. I understand why those focussed on the litigation are disappointed and selling out. Prospects for the organic business seem at least as good as they have ever been because of the production line financed by the unnamed US customer who withdrew, the financial stability provided by the settlement from Samsung plus visibility of a commercial order this year. If that deal is landed the share price will recover lost ground and the prospects will look very good. If it fails to materialise more patience will be required.

From July 2024 all new cars sold in the EC will be required by law to have driver monitoring systems fitted. Similar legislation is coming into the USA a year later. Driver monitoring systems is one of the areas Naoco have been featuring in their presentations for the last couple of years. The leading company is Seeing Machines who in the last year have done deals with Qualcomm, who provide information systems to car makers, and Magma, who integrate Seeing Machines software into mirrors. I don't think this is the production deal Nanoco expect to announce by June or July. But I do think there soon will be demand for lots of efficient sensors sensitive to infra red.
The fact Nanoco have enough cash to keep them in business for nine years and a production line puts them in a very good position to win a production order.
Nanoco have shed a lot of staff with PhDs over the last couple of years to reduce cash burn. The fact those staff think it worthwhile to compete in the market suggests they see a real prospect of winning business.

Difficult to see why you are still invested then. If commercial contracts are landed Nanoco will continue to do very well: it is not so long since these shares could be bought for 9p and less. Otherwise the money will eventually run out. If you believe in the company enjoy the journey. If you don't, move on. Life is short.