Member Info for ddubya

That’s right Daz but we have learned not to rely upon what NANO says in its RNS’s or sponsored media Edison either. Few have translated to reality. We need to wait for the contracts following research and product development lead times, which are of course measured in years.

Agree Bucheron. We are all ears for the distribution plan, which may well include some buy back and dividends. I suspect some tax liability will be an inevitability, irrespective of where it is held thanks to treatment of tax credits.

Only 60 to 80k units available for launch? Not great but they are going to be hot property and create a huge stir.

If we are in Vision Pro, production won’t be long in ramping up, with more orders and launch of the ‘lite’ version, where the money is. As usual, we will be the last to know.

I understand that viewpoint BeContrarian - a bit of a hedge whilst still being in the game.

The majority this morning seem to want a dividend, which suggests desire for an exit or at least a partial exit. That’s not too surprising after all that has transpired.

What are your predictions NGR?

Of the choices I can think of, repurchasing to Treasury is the one of the most favourable and tax efficient. However, BT has committed to offering some options and returning at least some cash to shareholders will be on the cards I suspect.

A happy New Year to you Hawi and all other NANO’s. I am also keen to learn what our options will be and I expect we should hear something before the end of the month?

The largest unknown is whether the market will discount the majority of the repayment/dividend within the SP irrespective of the means used. I suspect it will, at least until there is more news on orders that take us closer to profitability but there might be a more creative solution (or some other news) that provides a better outcome?

@NGR I don’t need to say anything either. Edison, BT and ME before him all provided frequent and glowing reports of growth that simply did not come to fruition and revised targets were presented with news of lengthy delays.

NANO is certainly on a more sound financial footing but it is not yet at an inflection point. That comes when there is sufficient demand for product that will ensure both profitability and growth. Still some way to go I am afraid.

@NGR. Are you saying that the recent order would not have materialised had NANO not settled?

A cash raise might have been one of the options I agree, although had the case been won in court a raise or rights issue may not have been difficult. Not risk free of course but the appeal process would have been well underway and possibly even the first round won by Summer 2024.

I believe the majors will see the potential prospects in the technology and may seek to secure advantage over competitors through takeover. However, if NANO is still not cutting it in 2 years then realising value is bound to remain elusive for longer and may never happen?

It is difficult to gauge anything about NANO’s potential from behind the veil of secrecy we are forced to accept due to confidentiality.

@Nanonano - Where did I say it was an attractive proposition? Not saying it cannot be though, it depends on our sales and future prospects at the time.

@Gonebroke. The outcome is what it is and it has certainly derisked the venture but I can’t see how it qualifies as an inflection point at all. The unexpected can be our friend and I hope it is but recovery will be measured in years, unless of course there is a trade sale?

@Gonebroke. “ Well, have a look at Netlist and Burford for an idea of what happens when you actually win the case.”

Granted that’s one example but there are many others where the successful party recovered what they expected or more.

Had a punitive award been granted in court it would have been exceptionally difficult to negotiate the settlement down to the level Samsung paid.

Jan 2023 was not an true inflection point and neither is NANO profitable yet.

The impact of the ‘dividend’ (whatever shape it takes) will be important. If the share price is discounted by the dividend, the only impacts are negative, including potentially CGT and the spread, if you want to buy back in. Reinvestment in ISA or Pension might be the only way to make a decent return in several years, if you believe the business case.

I am sticking to my prediction that the business will be subject of a takeover in around 18 to 24 months and probably before its true potential can be realised?

I can see the arguments about time costs and certainty acting in favour of settlement but I agree we should have held out for more and the evidence does suggest we would have been successful.

We can’t know, but I wonder what today’s share price would be had we won in court and also had the first commercial order under our belts. My guess is that it would have been well north of 17.5.

BT has said ‘Transformational’ and ‘Inflection’ even prior the settlement and not in ways linked solely to commercial production volumes.

@Flyinghigher. I agree that Vision Pro would not itself provide the inflection point shareholders hope for (and which BT says is here already 🤣) but do you not think it is the capabilities of IR sensors that are being showcased that present the real opportunity both through take up in other applications (and more sales of all grades of Vision products).

PS I am confident Apple is the end user but will need to eat humble pie if wrong of course.

Just a thought but could the 'device' be the silicon wafer BT was referring to, which will allow potential customers to test the capabilities of NANO product without commissioning a third party to create one?

On other matters:

We seem to be in an interesting trading patten whereby we see early gains, followed by a pull back of several % and at or just after close a recovery to a marginal blue position. We have witnessed this several times in recent days.

I think we are going to do well here longer term but I do wonder how BT expects a Feb 24 distribution to truly benefit to shareholders without value creating news in the interim? At the moment, it looks like it will simply provide a cheap entry point to reinvest NANO proceeds. Interested to hear if anyone else has some new and clever thoughts on this score.

He did indeed secure an order Maxi, for which I am grateful.

For me the lack of confidence stems from the 9th Jan RNS modifying expectations to that of a lower end settlement, when it could have been said in the RNS of the 6th, and also what gives the appearance of a ‘cosy’ arrangements with LOAM, including the rather lucrative loan. As usual, as. NANO shareholder, I am looking forward to receiving Jam tomorrow, when some, holding the very same asset, had theirs yesterday 🙄

@T I am positive on the future of the technology and value in the company but I have to say less confident in the ability of current management to secure the best for its shareholders, as is their statutory duty. Hopefully, the products are so good in such demand (thanks to NP and team) that it will be too difficult for the BoD to mess up 🤪

@NGR if you are saying the end user is not Apple, who do you think it is?