The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
lptuf93, looks as if your buy is showing as a sell, as the price was closer to the bid than the ask price.
BTB, an interesting point but I feel that based on
a) increased likelihood of commercial wins that will hopefully extend or maintain our cash position
b) the apparent weakness of Samsung's defence
the likelihood of NANO continuing as a going concern and an on multiples of the current SP, my personal rating is 70%/30% in favour.
All shares are a gamble, god knows I've had several bankruptcies to deal with over the years but to me this looks a reasonable bet/investment and will be staying put until the facts change materially.
From other cases, I get the feeling Samsung tends to string out proceedings for as long as possible and then appeals if they lose. Our case seems strong though: assuming we are successful at PTAB (and to my non-scientific eyes, the Samsung arguments seem patently (pun intended!) nonsense), the Samsung defence is weak at trial.
Do we know if Mintz will proceed with wilful infringement to add extra pressure for a pre-trial settlement? Against this we have Samsung's stubbornness, which may hold on hoping for success in the trial. Samsung has to balance the risks of losing with/without wilful infringement, or damage limitation through pre-trial settlement, versus the chances of them winning the trial.
Around $1bn in damages seems reasonable based on lost licence fees but there seems no precedent for the profit basis and were we to take this approach, the legal process would be stretched to its absolute limit. It's nice to daydream but I would rather we went for a lower amount on a more solid foundation.
Although commercial wins now look more likely than in the past, I am still in this share for the Samsung case. However, I do look to BTBs fairly depressing posts to put a leash on my confirmation bias: I won't risk adding to my 26k shares despite my optimism for a trial win.
Mmm, more positive news with a confirmed reserve, which looks to be the first of several over the coming months. Rather than selling some, I've just bought another 42,489 shares, which should appear on the Trades shortly. I really do think this company is finally on the rise (been waiting since 2009, mind you!).
GLA
Yes, a vote of confidence from a major holder is reassuring for the rest of us LTHs.
As for the RC drilling, the only other fact I remember is that it tends to avoid the 'nugget effect' you can get with diamond drilling, suggesting we will get more accurate estimates and helping to avoid future disappointment were reserves to be overstated.
My Buy is also showing as a Sell.
Gloster, I am not being 'revisionist', just a misty memory. Whatever the facts, I agree the Aussie escapade was a disaster and the buck stops with the BoD. At least this time it seems there is no intention to actually mine and I would expect the RNS to be as factual as they have been to date.
Presumably, they will have to provide the relevant evidence for the eventual JORC announcement. I am not familiar with the detail how this works but the BoD surely can't interfere?
If I may liken Samsung to a maggot - and I think I can, they will continue to wriggle. Everything lobo has been able to post (and thank you very much for all your hard work) points to what look like potential knockout blows for the PTAB and subsequently for the trial.
It seems to me that a buyout is unlikely, as the price would be too high and they would lose the possibility of winning the court case (we have to accept this is a possibility, albeit a remote one).
I am already overweight in this share but have made another 5000 share top-up at just over 19p. Hardly earth-shattering I know but my confidence in a favourable outcome for Nanoco is still very positive.
A different kettle of fish from us, admittedly. However, it was awarded by 'our' Judge Gilstrap in favour of what is arguably a patent troll company. I feel our case is strong for numerous reasons discussed in detail in previous posts and Nanoco has always been a genuine research and producing company and legitimately sought to protect its valid IP with patents. Samsung would never be able to appeal on the basis of us being patent trolls.
What I feel is that Samsung will continue to string things out for as long as possible and that there won't be an early out of court settlement unless the PTAB rules in favour of most of our claims. Even then, they may prefer to wait for a trial judgement (in the forlorn hope that they win) and the risk of wilful infringement despite their defence seeming to to be featherweight.
Although the SP has been drifting down since the high in April, I am planning to stay put and possibly make another small top-up.
As I've alluded to in a previous post, I don't believe we can blame the BoD for what happened when it was Tanzanite One. Large-scale illegal mining and no effective help from the government locally or nationally in Tanzania ruined a potentially good business. IMO, the sapphire venture was a mess and felt like a gamble in the last chance saloon. Nothing was ever mined if I remember rightly and for that, the BoD can be held responsible.
However, I am not aware of BoD members' shenanigans. We should also remember that in any career spanning decades, we all have highs and lows but it can often be human nature that tends to exaggerate the failures.
Looking at the current opportunity, for me it ticks all the boxes: an experienced BoD prospecting in a stable, first world country in an area with extensive and proven historical mining. Like all small companies, this is high risk for me and it is just possible that we have picked all the worst parts of this area. The recent RNS are positive and my sense is that LEX will establish substantial reserves from at least one of our six prospects and that will be reflected in the SP movement.
I am not sure what you are worried about - fraud, excessive cash burn, lack of expertise?? I haven't seen evidence of these in this venture. Perhaps you ought to sell or go short if you have major reservations about the management.
I do wonder if there is a lack of new investors because similar explorers look more interesting. For example, Cora Gold recently announced its 6th set of drilling results, which included one very rich level of 31g/t, and the SP jumped from 8p ish to 12p ish. We can't currently compare with that but their mines are in Mali. I would much rather be here in a stable area with a known history of successful mining.
By the time we get to our 6th drilling results, I believe things will be looking very rosy indeed and the SP will perform similar antics.
Great to hear all these differing opinions. I am torn between what BeContrarian's last 2 sentences say. I still really think that the court case is my primary investment case - commercial success has always seemed to elude Nanoco. I'm not saying it won't happen in future, but I am sceptical.
I am expecting Samsung to continue to string this out for as long as possible and that there will be no early settlement until (and if) the PTAB upholds the patents. More likely, they will hold out until a trial decision. Despite this, there's a small percentage of the optimist in me that says, just maybe an early settlement might happen. That, plus the SP decline of the past couple of days nearly putting me in the red means I am not selling. In fact, if the SP falls further, I may well top up, as I do believe in NANOs ultimate victory in court with substantial damages that will make this a multi-bagger. (And no, I'm not a ramper - first bought and sold in 2015, 2019 and have been holding since Feb 2020.)
Yes, as I remember it, there was quite large-scale illegal mining at the Tanzanite mine which required extra security to be employed and it was so unsafe for company employees that legal mining had to stop for some time. A combination of this and apparently unhelpful local government put paid to what was otherwise a promising venture. After all, tanzanite is rarer than diamonds. I may be wrong but I think the BoD was at least partly different in the sapphire venture, which struck me as a mess from beginning to end.
The current gold prospects have numerous positive aspects in a first world country. To my non-geological brain, they seem to have handled things well so far, especially with keeping sensible RNS that are neither too frequent nor frilly. It seems a case of when, not if, there will be a JORC maiden reserve announcement. Until then, we may see the SP drift in either direction. The SP movements are mainly incomprehensible in this share but we mainly seem to be LTHs so will put up with it in the short-term, having belief in medium-term prospects.
I think they are obliged to mention insolvency as a possibility to ensure (potential) investors are aware of the risk. It does jar as a sentence though: salvation or oblivion in a few words!! The fact that negotiations are ongoing with the FCA is perhaps the main positive point I picked up from the RNS. If they had been broken off, the SP would fall off a cliff.
Really positive results in this RNS that reinforce the confidence in the previous assay RNS. Also the fact that some is quite near the surface and so should be cheaper to extract.
I'm a bit surprised by the lack of SP action as a result though maybe I shouldn't be as most posters and investors here seem to be LTH. Surely it should only be a matter of time before a wider audience takes an interest and starts pushing up the SP. Roll on Phase 2 drilling - I'm excited and might even be tempted into a teeny top-up.
The RNS from 26th May said "The remaining results are expected in the coming weeks " so it may still be some time before more news. At least the SP seems stable following recent gains. Fingers crossed for more good news but I'll only be checking LEX once a day for now.
Yes, great to see more good news and continued momentum in the SP since about Jan. I got into this share in 2017 at 250p so am still losing badly but let's hope the upward move continues!
Hi, try this
https://www.amigoscheme.co.uk/docs/AllSchemeltdJudgement.pdf
I think AMGO will survive - it's in no-one's interest to see it fold now and the future is surely bright for the sub-prime market once the current issues and news negativity have been sorted out. The need for people to have access to this type of finance hasn't gone away and that was recognised by the Woolard Review.
My sense is something will be worked by AMGO that the FCA will agree with (or not object to), meaning some pain for shareholders and secured creditors but it will take months.
Averaged down by topping up a princely 10,500 shares at 9.36p to reduce my loss. Anyone else risking it today??
This is in the judge's conclusion:
" I have accepted the submissions of the FCA that the Redress Creditors lacked the necessary information or experience to enable them properly to appreciate the alternative options reasonably available to them; or to understand the basis on which they were being asked by Amigo to sacrifice the great bulk of their redress claims, while the Amigo shareholders were to be allowed to retain their stake.
143. I have also accepted the FCA’s submission that the court’s refusal to sanction the Scheme will probably not lead to the imminent insolvency of the Group; there is no evidence of any immediate (or even medium-term) liquidity crunch, and the directors will doubtless wish, if possible, to preserve the value of the enterprise for its various stakeholders. The FCA expects the directors to continue to explore and promote a restructuring which fairly allocates the benefits and losses among the various Judgment Approved by the court for handing down ALL Scheme Limited stakeholders. I agree with that, and would urge the directors to continue their efforts to promote a suitable restructuring."
If there is to be an appeal, surely it would have to satisfy these points and it doesn't seem to me the BoD will be able to do that. So it looks as if they will have to restructure in some way to offer more redress.
My guess is the BoD will have a Plan B to avoid insolvency but it will take time. Also, does it mean having to agree an updated corporate funding structure/SoA with creditors, and another vote? Again, I suspect it means months more work and the SP likely to stay low until there's some light at the end of the tunnel.
I may have missed it in the 33 page pdf but I don't remember seeing much/any mention of the FoS, which is plainly not an unsophisticated creditor!!
I don't know whether to risk a top-up now.