George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
The bowler hatted everyman Mr Benn was first seen on television on 25 February 1971. Introducing the cartoon as part of the Watch with Mother strand, the Radio Times said "Every week Mr Benn dresses up and finds himself in a different adventure." Mr Benn was written and illustrated by David McKee, who contrasted Mr Benn's ordinary suburban life at 52 Festive Road with the magical costume shop, and its shop keeper, who would appear "as if by magic".
Mr Benn's first adventure was as a red knight, stepping out of the changing room and into a world where he had to help a dragon. In later stories he variously became a big game hunter, cook, caveman, balloonist, zookeeper, caveman, diver, wizard, cowboy, clown, magic carpet
LOL - You're still in fine form I see - great to see. I still check out this board for the craic and your posts. Good fun. Not much invested any more other than a chunk in my daughter's ISA. Nigel provides endless entertainment - fascinating - I'd actually love to meet him (not necessarily in a dark alley) - seems an intelligent guy but.......
I'm taking the 0.24 tender. All indicators to me suggest any possible demand (assuming positive R&D) is 2+ years out. Recent investments demonstrates frustration in a lack of interest from parties far better equipped to progress development in 2nd gen materials. They're still looking for a an application for which there are adequate and cheaper alternatives. I'll take the hit and hold cash for now
2-3 years of JDA revenues doesn't sound particularly exciting - not even self sustaining. Any substantial commercial revenues waaaay off here following that announcement. Back to sleep on this one. I see that clown Nigel has invented multiple identities - absolute clueless embarrassment.
Not many names I recognize any more - trouble still entertaining - I'm guessing Nigel now morphed into NGR something and staying positive despite. Still got a few shares in my daughter's ISA - hope to recoup something next year at least - company continuing for benefit of current board and nothing else. Special dividend and possible bit of profit from dregs of IP nothing more. Happy to hold and forget.
In your case I'd be too embarrassed.
I live in the real world, accept my failings and work on them whilst also acknowledging my successes. I also try to respect others' and see no point in trying to invent other personalities and identities that are neither earned nor my own.
But - each to their own.
Nigel - I'm a chemist of some 30 odd years and small investor. I've been in and out of this share for a loooong time and done pretty well. Your arrival on these boards has added nothing but confusion in you apparent attempt to be all seeing and knowing - patent expert, inorganic chemist, litigation expert, company director....... the list is endless. What has happened repeatedly is you've been exposed as a fantasist by anybody that does actually have any insight into these fields. What could be a useful source of information to other investors is drowned out in your egotistical attempts to appear credibly knowledgeable. I know and you know that is far from reality. If you were to set yourself some realistic goals to achieve I think you would feel far more satisfaction in life rather than dragging others down on anonymous share chat boards.
Everyone rolls the dice but only a fools believes they made the right call. A little humility goes a long way.
Calls of the wild.
SL - really the point I was trying to make. Current litigation involved Nanoco's claim to pretty fundamental claims to basic synthesis of QDs. A pipeline of development springs from that and Nanoco have been busy subsequently and filed multiple patents. Given Samsung's claimed infringement and their own product development their research is certain to have overlapped in many aspects as it's derived from the same methodology. Assuming Nanoco's claims upheld Samsung would be wide open to future litigation unless a future working agreement is forthcoming.
Given the apparent momentum swing in Nanoco's favour regards a positive outcome, I took this morning's RNS as a signal a settlement was more likely than ever. Of course BT says see you in court. Historical data suggests settlement most likely and will be preferable to both parties going forward. Samsung have invested massively in QD display R&D and will want to future proof their ongoing development. Ongoing developments already potentially in the pipeline will rely on a good working relationship with Nanoco in the future given Nanoco's own patent filings in this area over the last few years. Risk assessed - seems a no brainer for Samsung to ultimately settle before judgment and Nanoco want to be involved with by far the biggest company involved in QD display.
So long in commercialisation making fundamental IP weak now. Solutions available now for current applications. Realistic future applications no longer have a conflict (<10 years). No current application = no current value. SOS