Stephan Bernstein, CEO of GreenRoc, details the PFS results for the new graphite processing plant. Watch the video here.
Question is are they going to be allowed to do so? Seems obvious there should be a ban but cynical me wonders whether consultation/protest periods are just a back door to extend exemption whilst developments continue in the background. Nanoco still remain coy regarding any performance data of their own offering and nobody taken them up so far despite numerous false starts.
NN - not sure what to think really. Loads of questions. Guess Najing argument may be that Samsung film not available to them? and that final tv set performance is based on various other optimised components of the tvs? Seems a bit of a half hearted petition though. Osram seems more concerned with on/near-chip type apps but i do note they ask the exemption to be applied to film still. Nothing from Nanoco, Nanosys, CSOT, BOE etc. From memory Nanosys claimed that they would no longer develop cad based material because they had no need to - that the performance gap had narrowed enough to make it irrelevant. Bits of performance data out there anyway from various companies - from Nanoco 'our dots are the best'. It would be nice to see the data supporting that claim. Maybe the dots themselves are but they're having issues incorporating them into a film application. Seems the ban is not 100% secure as yet though no? Travelling again so on my phone or I'd write a load more questions on subject.
8 week review finished 13th.... https://rohs.exemptions.oeko.info/index.php?id=316
No I've searched as well trouble but can't find anything. In the past there's normally published petitions (incl. from Nanoco) arguing their various positions but nothing new that I've come across. Seemed pretty specific from the article though. Maybe investor relations could enlighten or maybe not.
Was referred to in the avs forum article - don't see it as a PR /Nanosys invention - more an issue of viable alternatives. Nanoco basically already admitted they got 'so far' with the application but unrefined / unworkable. More work needed.
Https://www.avforums.com/news/samsung-delays-qd-oled-production-plans.16144
If the suggestions of yet another extension to the cadmium exemption are true then maybe it puts the kibosh on any hopes of nano taking a share of the film solution and therefore any supporting revenue streams. All reliant on this US partner deal? Watching out for automated sells appearing which could spell IIs bailing. Around the buy zone now but only for the brave!!
Agree feeks - not sure about the leaping of film on a commercial front though. Think it's easy to get caught up in cutting edge technology developments when you're researching and invested in something like Nanoco. I'd say average Joe is perfectly satisfied with LED/LCD offerings still and if they can be enhanced all the better. Film seems to be entering into very reasonably priced TVs now and may well become almost standard. I'd say that's where the commercial opportunities lie? I know next gen important for the various reasons and more important longer term but so far I haven't seen evidence of Nano being able to take advantage of current gen applications to make themselves self sustaining at least and able to fund advancing developments. I'm on my phone that may have all come out garbled as I can't read what I'm writing.
It's a protein that binds to cancerous cells and is fluorescent under uv. Been in development/trials for years - guess Nanoco's research is based on combined use with 'vivodots' to inprove resolution and longevity of the fluorescence. Among other markers with similiar properties. Not irrelevant by any means but no commercial breakthrough.
??? Are you serious ??? 5-ALA approved for use in cancer imaging has nothing to do with Nanoco who are researching enhancing the imaging capabilities. Years down the line if even successful (or necessary).
Https://www.avsforum.com/electroluminescent-quantum-dots-are-coming-sooner-than-you-think/
My understanding Wellwell is H1 2020 is covered contractually by the partner for ~£4m. During this time Nano is attempting to establish their process for mass production. I assume they must also supply a minimum quantity of material to the supply chsin to satisfy pre-production / prototype development. It's a tight timescale and there are no guarantees they will succeed. I highly doubt there will be any additional revenue from 'commercial supply during this time. H2 2020 may bear fruit but we have no view of application/market size. All ifs and buts. Cash needs rearing its ugly head again.