Member Info for ddubya

Whatever way this goes I would be comfortable checking out with an offer that provides me with some profit.

It is time to spend the funds on my retirement, including travel to Greenland and Canada before Donald absorbs them into the US.

Sammy. What might add complexity to this sale is determining and agreeing value on products that NANO is developing for the Far Eastern major, and the non-patented product it has mentioned in the past? There are bound to be sensitivities around disclosing too much information too soon to parties that have no intention of bidding.

We can probably assume the many partnerships that were in the pipeline (and did not materialise) have no value whatsoever?

I would be shocked Sammy but in a pleasant way because NANO has delivered about the square root of Zero in over 20 years.

I would be shocked if we were progressing several active bids too but who knows?

No it does not feel like great news for the purchase talks but for that to be a true statement it would mean information has been leaked by insiders on one side of the fence or another.

It could just be down on the absence of any updates, and without leak? I am not going to take it as an indication of anything for the moment and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Beats being regularly s£@f&ed.

In the imagination of brain and the Board?

No doubt in my mind that we have been duped to line the pockets of the few. However, there may still be value in our portfolio, most likely from products we have not patented. Is 2025 the year we expect to have a major update (one way or other) from the Far East major?

With the US threatening everyone with Tarrifs on everything, I would imagine that Europe and the EU will need alternative sources of CNG. Could the Falklands be such a supplier in a few years, if Russia does not sweeten up, or even if it does?

Well observed Phippsy😍. Another acquisition.

There is a push for Europeans to use CNG from the US and finally cut ties to Russian gas. US tankers are already delivering more to Europe as the possibility of further US sanctions loom. Surely this bodes well for any Gas major that can supply CNG for onward transport to Europe and can’t hurt DEC either? Prices are bound to rise and volumes of delivery increase too. Or, is this flawed logic?

BT set the benchmark as you say Kooba at a bargain basement price.

Should have gone to Court in my view, even though there were associated risks. Had we won the Court case the judge would have set a value on compensation at several or many times the amount BT settled for.

It really should not be difficult and the FCA should have ensured it was implemented decades ago. In my view the current system creates uncertainty and therefore allows for manipulation. Wake up FCA and overcome self interest and lobby groups to introduce some transparency.

Sounds like we have Elon a great deal in return for the contracts. However, it is a bit like the Dragons Den (Shark Tank for our US friends). You either take the opportunity to build your business now and give up shares, or risk never getting off the ground. No doubt the Board did the right thing here.

Having a new source of oil and gas for Europe in particular makes a huge amount of sense Gus. I suspect that delay results from feint hope that Russia will give up its aspirations for an Empire and join reality? After all billing oil and gas half way around the world does not make too much sense, if it can come via pipeline to your doorstep. We are finally getting close to knowing the answer and it is nice to be back in a modest profit after so many years.

again buting to see if Russsia might t certainly seems to make sense that

“ Can the new management team turn things around?… may be impossible without the backing of a significant third party.”

Very much agree that NANO will likely only realise its value when backed by a major. Whether there is any interest in NANO at all may depend upon the detail of the licensing agreement we have with Samsung and whether it limits the potential benefits for a purchaser.

There was never going to be an ongoing licence fee paid, and the Court would have determined an up front equivalent payment but the amount of the Samsung settlement was derisory, especially given the proportion of value attributed to the patent ‘Sale’ element 😕

Yes Sammy, that is certainly one thing that is on my mind that would be considered commercially sensitive.

The RNS is interesting because it says there is something commercially sensitive in nature going on but we can’t tell anyone about it! Well we did not know until you announced the management team ‘rewards’. That indicates something is up to me.

As Kooba says the CEO is probably deserving of it , as is our CTO, but the FD is receiving it because he is now ‘key’ likely to be fully engaged for a few months - at least that is my take. I have no knowledge of the facts.

Could be Sammy. The RNS states “…the performance condition is commercially sensitive.” It is possible that performance is linked to a potential sale price? It also states that more information will be disclosed in the mid year Remuneration report, which to my mind increases the likelihood we are looking to sell and may well be in discussion already, unless we are confident of having news from our Far East customer by that time?

Likely most of that decline is a direct of Brexit? I wonder how the public would vote today with the benefit of hindsight and knowledge of the outcomes for immigration, trade and our economy? Where are the honest politicians when you need them?

Lol Two Good. NigWit won’t agree, but shareholders have a valid concern that management has been over rewarded, made highly questionable decisions and very much underperformed in general.

However, the new CEO has stepped in with his wallet and aligned himself to shareholders so there remains hope of a decent return be that through a trade sale or organic growth. Having said that for the likes of me who is down after 15 years, it would take a big uptick to recompense for the lost opportunity cost 🤣

With the Chinese ceasing supply of Gallium, who knows, it may encourage focus on development and use of QD as its replacement?

This is costing Directors ‘real’ money and infers confidence in their ability to turn this into a profitable concern. It is exactly what we needed (as a first step) and something the previous CEO was completely unwilling to do to any meaningful extent.

It should be telling everyone that the Directors see value in our shares and so represent a big boost to confidence. Not sure the SP is fully reflecting that yet.