Member Info for ddubya

Lol. Have you bought any more today Mattyboy?

The vote went as expected and RG is looking forward to updating us when possible. Otherwise, I was not sure what to expect from today's meeting but it did feel like a bit of an anti climax. 'Onwards and backwards' to the next RNS.

Nice to see they want to communicate better! Might be a good idea to start with getting a microphone to those asking or answering questions, so those on the call can hear what is being said.

@Morbox Alison Fielding mentioned that. A bit confusing but my take from discussion is that they decided not to go to court having secured the $11.5m?

Thanks Kooba - showing my age

Thanks Ecclescake. Definitely worth a listen.

I see the word ‘exceptional’ has been omitted from the ‘general meeting’ we are about to have - wonder why?

@NGR. Certainty is never conveyed in any official publication, except where it is the case (which is rare). That is because the FCA requires it, and therefore use of words such as ‘potential’ or ‘possible’ convey nothing whatsoever and are used regardless of the strength of belief a company may have. You should know this and if that really was your sole rationale for assuming a low settlement then you have been correct for entirely the wrong reasons.

Are you displaying the benefit of hindsight NGR? Could you please provide a concise list of the rationale you employed to be so certain the settlement would be this low? This will help everyone be more aware and educated for future benefit.

Peace is what we want flatcap and I agree weapons are often sold to those who should not have them.

There is also a view, which I subscribe to, which is that that military strength ensures we are able to keep the peace. The military needs to be kept at a state of readiness as it can’t be stood up and armed immediately, to meet all unexpected challenges.

Arguably without BA and others like it there would be more war and destruction, so arms are a necessary evil we are not able to uninvent or dispense with without true international co-operation, something we should be working for.

@Qdnano. The point I think you are making is that future royalties have been included. I agree that is the case, and we received the ‘patent peace’ that is normal in such settlements, avoiding need for dialogue with parties you can’t trust to agree royalty payments.

The surprise for many is the derisory level of compensation accepted due and even that is paid by instalments. Was it worth gifting our prized IP for that sum?

I firmly believe we would have done much better in the longer term by going to trial the very next day although I can see that validation of patents may delivered benefits that are not yet public. It will not help litigation against any other transgressors either, since the level of damages effectively renders it uneconomical to recover.

We need to move forward but it is difficult to imagine how NANO could accept such a low value settlement given the strength of the case NANO said it had (£4m net against Samsungs additional profit of £billions). Crime it seems does pay and on top of the ‘governance’ issues that’s another point many shareholders correctly view as an injustice. It is difficult to have any confidence in the Chairman or CEO given the ‘LOAM notes’ debacle, suspicion of insider trading and the settlement value.

I can’t see Hamoodi getting close in the EGM vote but he might be back next year, when the position could be very different, unless of course Tenner delivers meantime.

Thanks for this link qdnano. This QD film ST micro has developed looks very clever and I am sure it will have a large number of uses in various items of specialist equipment, e.g. in quality control, security and military applications. It reminds me of the spectacles available in my childhood, which claimed to let you see your skeleton through flesh - looks like todays QD version works a little better.

We are rather going round in circles in terms of the settlement value, which at some point needs to be consigned to history. It won't change unless something quite exceptional happens. The question of trust in the Board is certainly 'linked' but it is a different matter that we either need to manage over time, or sell.

For my part, I consider we were misled by NANO's bullish and upbeat announcements but we now need to look to the product validations, orders and the dividend/repurchase for some solace. Perhaps in the meantime BT will pull a hat out of a rabbit or something else to make us smile.

For those that consider we were not misled, I wonder, did you ignore NANO's positivity, pay the firewall fee, meticulously review the court documents and then sell up, or did you use some other plausible method(s)?

Whilst there is a close period that applies between having knowledge of results and their publication, I believe there are many other factors that could likewise prohibit staff from trading shares, for example, knowledge of any price sensitive information such as a sizeable order, or offer to purchase shares of the company. These circumstances could be equally relevant (?) and indeed BT requested in his recent presentation we should be mindful of the limitations they are subject to, i.e. they are not able to release all information they are aware.

That's right Kooba and it is called 'Having skin in the game'. There is no potential for pain if your own money is not at risk and only gain where you collect 'free' share options and sizeable amounts of them. The Board would perform better if its interests were aligned fully with those of its shareholders, which in my view they have not been.

@crumbs - you have done well!

I am still well underwater but more hopeful of break even + than I have been in a few years.

Revenue has doubled, which is good but it remains a case of “Yes, we have no customers” at least not so far, which confirms the continued delay we expected.

A little too early for celebrations and this update seems to be garnering support ahead of the vote. I don’t think it is the EGM vote BT needs to be worried about.

@troublesome. I certainly feel like I have been exceptionally patient with NANO having been here from 2010 or earlier.

To be honest another 5 years would have little appeal, unless I can see orders and an increasing share price, in which case I would be happy to hold.

There have been too many ‘dangling transparent carrots’ none of which has come to fruition.

Times may have not been easy but the team has been well remunerated and commercialisation is now well overdue in my view.

I will give BT another few months though, following which I shall be voting against certain Director reappointments at AGM’s.

At least having a market cap of less than cash expected from Samsung should make it less likely the share price will head south quickly and unexpectedly, or by a large amount. And news of positive cash flow from here should be reflected in value.

I still wish I had gone with my cautious side and hedged bets by selling a few in the 50’s though!

Not always helpful but I see that Motley Fool (Jon Smith) has given us a mention of being worth a punt today

https://www.fool.co.uk/2023/08/04/id-forget-rc365-shares-i-think-these-2-penny-stocks-could-be-next/?source=uc1401cs0010001

@GA. Do you mean Nigel Pickett? If so, and the share does well, that might be a decent strategy, although timing it might be tricky.

Quite a few PI would be doing the same thing if/when it becomes public information. The question is, would others be out already and at a better price having exercised even ‘better judgement’?

Good news would be awesome T.

However, if the intention is to sway the vote in favour of the current board, that news is needed now before too many have cast their votes, so my suspicion is there is none to offer at the moment?