Member Info for ddubya

I have never believed PI's operate on a level playing field with II, which hold many advantages and always find ways in which to relieve PI of their funds. VLS has been a disappointment, and I did expect both the momentum and SP to keep moving forward. it has not happened but in situations like this, I feel the best thing to do is shift to the long term view (and pick up more cheap shares when possible). Many PI are fed up and have sold/will sell because the expected short term gain has not materialised. However, the markets understand psychology and when enough have transferred their shares to Institutions you can bet investment news will arrive, e.g. agreement reached on Shell/IAG investment in Altalto. After all, if they don't want Aviation fuel and Diesel sold to their competitors, they need to be part of the solution.

I think we shall be diluted again prior to realisation of Immingham but, if hype is realised the rewards should be significant and well ahead of 2025.

Samsung Display will be selling QD colour filter components to Chinese firms, which if they include stolen IP will give grounds for further litigation in China, Korea and anywhere that such TVs are sold. Whether it is worth pursuing because of legal costs and shelf life of certain patents is debatable but knowledge of what they are doing will not sit well with the Texan Court I suspect.

Certainly something for Mintz Levin to consider and possibly bargaining power to incur an injunction for US imports?

A really good You Tube poster ‘Stop the FOMO’ has released a really interesting new video. My only reservation about this Tuber is that he is a strong advocate of Nanosys and never mentions NANO, possibly because he is also East Coast?

However, he states that Samsung Electronics will not be using the QD colour filters developed by its sister company Samsung Display (and Nanosys I believe). In amazement, he asks why not, when CFQD colour filter is the Holy Grail all display brands seek?

Instead Samsung Electronics is looking to source micro LED components from China to further develop current (outdated) display technology. The video suggests this is madness and also it means QNED will not be happening soon and that QD colour filters will reach the market via Chinese manufacturers first before Samsung.

All sounds a bit mad but I wonder if this revelation might have more than a little something to do with the IP concerning CFQD manufacture and also have to NANO’s litigation?

Perhaps Samsung does not want To add to CFQD production at this point in time?

Take a look at the video yourselves, to see if you can make better sense of it.

https://youtu.be/fY32u8g9FPs

I think so Maninpink but it could also be there is nothing to know, as anyone could be taking up a position, e.g. a wealthy individual or fund.

As and aside, I had hoped that as the old Merck contract expired, that void would be quickly filled by news of a new contract. As that did not transpire, the wait for more good news could be of any length I am afraid.

The RNS of 30 April stated that NANO was "...no longer considered to be in an offer period..." so Directors should be able to buy now, although any such purchases would likely trigger another RNS.

The recent purchase could be anyone, perhaps someone with knowledge of the Third Party due diligence process undertaken by the TP funder, or an Investment Manager taking an educated guess on the outcome?

That’s NANO - quiet until it’s not. Would be nice to see the right type of action, like a Merck or ST Micro deal.

Until VLS and the market surprises everyone and It shoots up instead of down, for example, on news of Shell/IAG investment. VLS needs to be funded and also prove to be a success, otherwise Grant and Boris are going to look rather stupid.

Understand Cizur - carefully controlled then but all sounds positive. More difficult might be to predict what the impact will be on SP at tomorrow's open - you would think positive but...when were we able to confidently predict the market?

Thanks for that Cizur. I shall listen to the call myself too, hopefully later this evening if available. Were you able to gauge the sentiment/opinion amongst analysts?

OK - much better than 23% so will keep an aye on this for my next top up.

Likely very much undervalued but with a huge spread (currently 23.53%) the MM's are limiting interest in trading it. No idea how that level can be justified?

I see the market done its thing and fixed that anomaly by dragging us down too HJ. We have Kape as a long term hold for my wife and so are not at all bothered by the intraday or short term. It has really benefited from Covid and home working worldwide (in addition to the great management team and strategy) so really pleased it continues to be one of our best performers.

The sells do not amount to much in money terms, so probably means little or nothing at all. Neither the stock market nor NANO is predictable I am afraid.

Sorry that Auction is old news!

Price monitoring extension, so looks like there is a little difficulty finding the right opening SP this morning.

As you say Entelon, the NANO team is likely to be very familiar with this aspect of QD tech, but hopefully it is not also a NANO concept shared with Samsung. Come to think of it no one has ever defined what a Nano Particle is (ST Micro +Apple), so it is possible these are very much more than the humble CFQD. We really are just at the beginning of the QD journey.

That's an interesting question Amerloque. When NANO advised of the action it was taking it said it"...seeks a permanent injunction from further acts of infringement..." but it is not clear at what stage a decision on injunction is made by the Court. It could be following consideration of the initial information, or when a verdict is reached? If I had to guess which, I would say the Judge and Court need all the information to enable a decision, which means later rather than sooner (unless Samsung's case is hopeless). From the Court's perspective, to decide on an injunction prematurely could serve to harm an innocent party (not that I believe Samsung is!) and it is not likely to do that.

Having discussions about contracts and not getting them is exactly what we have had in the past SL and Maninpink asked what the worst position would be not what is the middle ground. That is why I answered in the way I did and have not changed my mind :)

Worst case scenario Maninpink is no further Display and/or IR contracts the business scales down and Samsung wins the litigation, so the SP slips back over 80%. That is the risk but against that you need to consider the probability is of the above coming true, or the alternative where new orders are received from ST Micro, Merck and others, the business turns a profit and a one off payment arrives from Samsung at some point over the next 4 years. If I thought the most likely outcome was the former, I would not be invested here.

I am not sure how it works either SL but the end of August is just the deadline to file the response to NANO’s complaint. I don’t think the Judge makes any immediate decisions at that stage.

I expect some form of consideration of Samsung’s defence would follow but unless it were completely baseless, the setting of a trial date would surely follow. If the judge thought any aspect of the defence difficult to believe, I imagine he might ask the defence if it was sure of its ground and warn them that if it turned out to be twaddle he would take a dim view.

Not sure if the public gets to see (or subscribe to see) Samsung’s defence but I would really welcome a view of that document.

Anyone know the Texas way?