Member Info for ddubya

I am guessing of course but I would say 70% confident the end user is Apple. They would be a great suitor that would give added credibility but if it is them, news will seep out over time in the industry I suspect rather than from day one.

EUDA is doing well and currently up over 11%, if that can be relied upon as any sort of indicator.

It sure would T but alterations in timing of the Vision Pro launch and reduction in volume match the NANO narrative, so there has to be a high probability we are in.

2023 started so bright for NANO, and it is a major disappointment for PI to see the SP at current levels. The signs do look better for 2024 but more particularly 2025, 2026 and beyond, although that is little compensation for those expecting a settlement more in keeping with BT's statements, many of whom had bought in to the 37p raise or at a higher levels.

@Nanonano. I realise you meant as a customer but “Like Dow, Apple, STMicro etc.?” Yes please, any could buy us at the right price and it may work out better for us if one did. Certainly there was no serious interest a couple of years back but we are on a different position today. I do have a concern that BT would let the business go relatively cheaply and in doing so secure his retirement though.

You don’t need to convince me on CFQD though. I also believe it is now largely a lost opportunity, at least until RoHS takes effect, if ever.

@SteakandAle. Unfortunately, these are my thoughts too. It needs a multinational to fully exploit the potential of CFQD, IR and 2D, whilst not also getting shafted by the likes of Samsung.

It is possible we may never get to the distribution part and it is overtaken by events? The distribution options are in any event limited and have downsides.

The company science is exceptionally well positioned, just need to capitalise one way or the other.

Interesting comments, including on potential takeover TG2D. Always thought a takeover is the way forward but If true, would best value be obtained at this stage? Might even be have something to do with BT's Big Apple trip.

In mitigation, NANO was in hibernation mode until the beginning of the year but I am probably just offering making excuses, since it was out of AIM before hibernation - a bit careless really.

A flat share price on the day is pretty disappointing. Thought it might do better but there's always tomorrow, next month, next year... and beyond.

Agree @BeContrarian. Unfortunately, the share price reflects the tail of the Samsung story and premature promise of ‘inflection’ etc. There must be few that predicted we would be at 19p having both won the legal case and delivered the first commercial production run. We still have no going concern value built in.

It might still be slow going from here but the direction of travel must surely be upwards and there might be some very large prizes along the way?

@Ecclescake. Any sale would be good but everyone knows how difficult it is to convince Apple to use any product that is not thoroughly reliable and tested to death, as well as offering only the best performance. This adds credibility and keudos which is very important to convince others that NANO is well worth a look and will likely lead to more orders sooner.

Good news today certainly but if we get to BOOM times it will not be until further contracts are secured. If we are in bed with Apple there could be more good news next year but the market is not ready for us yet, so sensors in mainstream phones, which is a prized volume target is not for the near future.

I doubt we shall see the 37p raise price unless and until Apple is the end user and their cheaper vision product comes to market. That would be lift off but until then, my expectations are for the big money in 2026/27 or earlier takeover.

2D products may have an unexpected say though?

That Apple is not a certainty as the end user does not really bear repeating since it is a well known fact but you make a good point that interest from other manufacturers might be forthcoming. We have a non exclusive arrangement with ST Micro, so other suppliers could either become involved or the OEM could buy from ST Micro too. That’s the kind of future we all want to see develop.

Apple as an end user would provide far greater value than almost anyone else but I do wonder what the next news would be? Distribution/ dividend and then supply of sensors for the lower cost headsets?

I hope there are other possibilities in the pipeline, otherwise good news could be thin in the ground for a good number of months or years.

I hope the wait proves worth it in the long run.

@NGR "Hardly grounds for calling the BoD crooks and villains in other words?"

Is it the acceptable standard for the Board to not be known villains and would it be OK for them to knowingly issue messages that convey different messages? Perhaps we have a right to expect more, for example, a little integrity and honest communication, without being subject to caveat emptor.

Interestingly, the FCA is busy rolling out a new Consumer Duty, which includes obligations to ensure products perform as advertised and that communications are clear and fair. One of the concepts is to avoid 'foreseeable harm' to customers. It will be interesting to see how the FCA will apply this standard to RNS and other communications for shares. Hopefully, it might eliminate some of the double speak that is so common in the Investment industry?

The NANO business model for CFQD is licence fee revenue, so when it said "...we calculate that lost revenue in the United States attributable to the patent infringement to date could be in the region of US$200–250m or more..." most people took that to refer to lost licence fees. The message lacked clarity hence it was misunderstood by many/most. There is no point in communicating unless it carries little to no chance of misinterpretation. Unfortunately, those who write RNS and Press releases think it is OK to issue messages that can be interpreted in more than one way, and not just at NANO.

What incentive would there be for EUDA to merge with THX, unless they had also obtained written assurances from VAL/THX detailing the circumstances that permit access to VAL's portfolio, or parts thereof?

True NGR, but the cost of our financial stability has come at a very steep price. A lifetime licence granted to Samsung in return for an amount that can't really be viewed as 'fair value' even by reference to NANO's own commentary.

Had NANO won the court case and an award closer to £400M ben made, I doubt many would have been unwilling to support a rights issue. Better than being diluted by preferred insider shareholders? I think so, but I do recognise the risk the court case may not have gone our way. However, in public , all parties were fully in support of NANO's strong case right up until the evening prior to the court hearing.

Agree NGR, there was risk of needing to raise funds again but a few £m would likely have covered us to breakeven. If the court case had gone against Samsung, I doubt there would have been difficulty in raising the cash, either via a rights issue or placing, and likely from a much higher share price than todays.

@Kooba - Should have gone to court. My sentiment exactly, since we have so far not seen good reason for folding the day before the Court case opening and for a derisory sum too. Nothing we can do though, so I am resigned to it now but I suspect court would have been a far better route forward. It is possible of course there is relevant information, which the Board has not revealed and would have led us to a different conclusion?

The benefits of Commercialisation (if it happens) are likely to flow well after the court case and any appeal were decided. I suspect they wanted to get back to BAU rather than continue the fight and saw an opportunity to run a funded operation as too good to miss? I can see that point of view but we are now chasing a very different and less well developed market, with the obvious time implication.

@NGR If it is not dead then it is another income stream, which is all to the good.

Overall, I am happy we have news today rather than the alternative of silence, or confirmation that co-operation with the Asian firm had ended. I don't think there is anything else that BT could have said in the circumstances, so I find myself in agreement with LordWM and BeContrarian's thoughts - positive developments and a credible plan emerging, even if it is longer term than most would have hoped.