Member Info for ddubya

The Mail has published a short article on the TP funding arrangement. Interestingly, it mentions that NANO "was unable to agree an out-of-court settlement with Samsung." It has not been stated publicly that NANO was in discussion, although it is not a surprise. Not sure if this means discussions broke down in the last few days but it would fit with the timing of today's RNS. Good to have publicity too.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-8518489/Nanotechnology-firm-seals-funds-sue-Samsung.html

NANO has never made much sense Botbot - and issuing an RNS on a Monday instead of Friday - what’s that about?

The SP does not say so but the litigation is de-risked and a free ride from here. The business is another matter but that could turn around soon.

As a LTH, I agree on current valuation SL but unfortunately we don’t set the SP. I think we are in that strange place where the company holds exceptional value, yet the market remains to be convinced it will be delivered.

If and when orders come in I think we shall see the SP rise more steeply than the order size would normally justify, because belief in the model will have been restored. We are drawing closer, just need the orders.

The Samsung litigation also now holds value for shareholders even if another QD or nano particle is never sold and that is a plus but of course the long term and greater value is in IR, Display and other applications.

NANO not BANK. I'm binning this tab!et.

SL - The RNS states that BANK's "...relative and absolute share of any award will increase with the size...award.". I think this means cake for everyone but larger slices for NANO if the award is bigger. On the SP, it certainly we-risks the litigation but Does not secure BANK's future as an On going concern. Only orders will do that so I do not expect more than low 20's but if orders arrive, we could move North very quickly. The !litigation becomes a very large helping of jam but the business will have even more value.

Really good news. Interesting timing too, with Samsung’s response due at end August. It might need to review its submission now it has certainty that NANO has the means to defend itself. That’s an astute tactical move that may have caught Samsung off guard and might prompt them to settle?

Like others I am also with HL and whilst I have not yet received a message confirming it, my account shows both basic and excess entitlements have been allocated. Really surprising and no doubt bombing of the SP in recent days is responsible - many would not have requested any excess entitlement fearing that it would go below 5p. I am going to guess it stays a little above 5p but only for as long as it takes Shell and IAG to agree a strike price and buy their way in. Let's wait to see if that prediction comes right.

Very important to satisfy Mrs botbot. Pretty sure you must be PI Premier League in terms of holdings bot, unless a few others put claim to more than 2m?

I and I am sure others will join you both on a cruise if we reach £3.

That second sentence should read "I have a large holding here, although not quite in the botbot league" I need to stop using a Fire tablet to post as spell check seems to have a mind of its own.

Good morning Nige. You have said before that I have a pessimistic outlook but I don't think that an accurate assessment of my position. I have a large holding here, although not quite in the horn of league. I consider my position realistic, whilst also remaining optimistic NANO still has some time to turn things round.

There is little doubt that IR sensors are set to become much more commonplace and NANO can and should be able to do good business in a growing market, so it's future should be assured in some shape or form. However, NANO is close to hibernation and either needs to generate new income streams now, or raise cash well ahead of Q2020 to keep the status quo.

There is absolutely no certainty that Samsung will settle or buy NANO. There has been sample opportunity for them to do so already any they have chosen not to. It will cost Samsung a fortune only if NANO has TP legal funding (I believe it is available) and wins the case on a profit settlement basis. Settlement on the license value would be much more modest but still big numbers - could be around £200 to £400m.

In my view Samsung will not settle for as long as there is an outside chance that NANO is unable or unwilling to litigate or goes under, at which point it would make a decision offer for the IP it has alleged!y stolen. I don't see that happening because LO has remained committed and sees value (primarily for itself) but that does not mean our holdings as PI are safe. We have been massively diluted in the past 10 years and if new income is not delivered in the next 2-3 months, further dilution will be both inevitable and large. Although we all hope for the best it makes sense to keep these very real risks in mind, so I do try to present what I believe is a balanced view for others to consider and for their own opinion and look for the same in the comments of others.

As you suggest, new income stream is essential to be a going concern without qualification next year Nanonano. Orders from Merck, ST Micro, Apple or anywhere would be welcome but any news that exists would have been better communicated ahead of Merck contract expiry. This is a very NANO way of doing things, and not to my liking, but I have hope the recent rise is an indicator something may be close. Fingers crossed as the alternative is unattractive.

If the Dow factory, adjacent to Samsung’s, has been making CFQD for Samsung all these years then, we can expect further litigation against Dow, when the Samsung litigation is concluded. I do wonder what has been happening there, e.g. has it been mothballed or dismantled?

ME has regularly over promised and under delivered but in fairness, he has not been dealt a fair hand. NANO claims Samsung (at least) has been guilty of IP theft and effectively working to cull it. Conspiracy theory perhaps but none of us is naive enough to believe such things never happen. If NANO can stay solvent and arrange litigation finance, I think we shall get there, although it could be a long journey.

ME seemed to be inferring a new relationship from a more “active” Merck, so you never know Basscadet, it could be more exciting and bigger than the previous contract? Let’s hope so.

I also favour the bird in hand approach (but think £500m in total would be more reasonable).

The key question I have at the moment is when will we receive news on Merck? A new deal Is just what we need. If there is one to be had it could be a complex arrangement but with the notable exception of last week, without the SP normally heads south.

That’s right Basscadet but when the case commences, NANO will have entered into an arrangement with the third party funders, so there will be a substantial pay away. I am not convinced Samsung will settle early because of the scale of potential damages but would love to be wrong.

My recollection is of 31 August as being the original extended deadline set by judge Gilstrap Nige, but I believe parties will be in discussions. Given the backlog of court cases the judge will want to do what he can to minimise caseload and encourage out of court settlements. I think both parties have been warned not to bring a case unless they have done their best to reach a solution and are unab!e to. If that view is correct and Samsung drags its feet, or is seen to waste court time, it should assist NANO in any award for damages.

Investing in shares can be speculation and the market usually finds ways to relieve PI of their hard earned.

In my view, the current SP does not currently reflect the promise held. On the bright side, that it has not performed to everyone's expectations means a greater chance of picking up more Excess Entitlement shares at 5p, following which any good news e.g. Shell and IAG investment could quickly elevate the SP. DYOR of course.

So not a reverse takeover of Samsung then. I shall settle for the Merck news.

Now we have timing sorted botbot, we just need to know what that RNS will say :)

Certainly cannot have hindered the process SL! Happy with another 7% today - going the right direction for once, even if we have no idea why.