Member Info for ddubya

Probably best not to look JBongo. The focus now is on businesses that cannot survive without state support.

I feel sure that NANO will have access to money but at what price? To think that if a licence agreement had been in place, NANO would not have need of funding (dilution) and would have been reasonably well protected from Covid-19.

The circumstances might just encourage a climate of increased judicial empathy for the ‘small’ guys and persuade him to award punitive damages, or injunction, if he finds in NANOs favour.

Interesting article highlighting a couple of potential uses for QD in Smartphones, in addition to Display and IR sensors.

The future market for QD must be enormouus, and NANO's share surely much more than today's £24m, the price of a couple of terraced houses in Kensington.

https://www.tapscape.com/the-use-of-quantum-dots-for-smartphones/

Here’s the link Catiche.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/NANO/14446980.html

Hi Catiche. I refer to the one of 4 March so nothing new, although it’s effects linger. Sorry if I gave the impression of news!

The journey down from my first purchase at £1.75 has been long, slow and exceptionally painful. And just when we think we are finally out of the woods (again) that RNS delivers friendly fire on top of Covid-19 woes. I suspect the RNS was intended to bring the SP price down for a cash raise, and if so, mission more than accomplished.

The consolation is that any rise could be just as prolific as the drop. I shall be seeing this one through to the end, whatever outcome, and at least we do not carry any debt!

Researcher1 if you are out there, I decided to make amends and take your advice to buy a few more sub 10p.

Entirely possible Torpedo. However, if it is, it has not been quick to come forward. It is a tangled web and lots of skulduggery about but I still believe NANO has great value - just don’t want it sold off for someone else to cream the profit without the investment - like SXX.

Thanks for looking through the papers Morbox.

I have been meaning to do something similar but doubted my ability to form any meaningful conclusions.

If NANO the inventor of the seeding process says “Samsung’s dot are the same as the Nanos US patented dots” there have to be good grounds to believe they might be correct but the Court must also be persuaded of course.

To derive anything near NANO’s true potential I suspect we need to buckle down (again) for another long haul but it should be worth it.

Remote chance of a large surprise offer meantime but I am not counting on it.

Oops - realised it is exactly the same as Mr BWM sent.

Hi GrdianAngel. I have a copy of the 18 page complaint, if that is what you need but I am not sure how to get it to you - as I am not a Premium Share Chat member?

Yes I wondered if they knew an RNS was coming and took the opportunity to buy (on assumption of good news) but without knowing what it contained?

Should have said that it also states"We respect the intellectual property of others by avoiding acts of infringement such as copying, distribution, modification or use without permission." I am feeling more relaxed already.

I found a link to detail of a Samsung Code of Ethics and Compliance Programme. Apparently Samsung complies with all Laws and Ethical standards, so it must be innocent of all wrongdoing and no doubt their Ethics Committee will be delving into all legal questions raised by NANO's court action as we speak. I wonder how it reported on the KAIST action over each of the past 7 years?

https://sec-audit.com/common/portal/sdpMain.do

If it is your last, then I had better say it has been NicetoMichu before everyone else does, and good luck to you too.

My decision to buy more yesterday looks rather stupid today I agree but then again, Display needs CFQD and if OEM cannot buy them from Samsung, where will they source them? Also, the review and sale negotiations continue, so there are most likely to be several more twists and turns to take control of what is ground breaking technology that will found in many future applications.

Feel sure you are right researcher1. If there is any news we shall hear about it but otherwise it is time to take a lengthy break from NANO and let matters take their course. So close yet so far for NANO, but it was ill advised to allow Samsung to have samples (and probably knowledge) in the first place without suitable controls to protect against IP theft (as alleged). ME that one has to be on you, as does the loss of 50% of share capital in just over 24 hours - not an easy accomplishment.

I hope Samsung sells lots of QLED TV, and hope they are keeping a tally of the likely compensation due to NANO in due course.

I expect that barring one of the unexpected events NANO throws up every so often, the next milestone is the April filing date for Samsung’s defence. Could be quiet here for a while.

Or can see that he is likely to be diluted also?

that was not one of my questions Mr BWM but it is a decent one. To facilitate an LO placement at below 10p could be a rational explanation. To add insult to injury, it is likely to be a larger placement to cover costs incurred as a result of the Samsung action and build out into new markets.

That’s pretty much how I view it Mr BWM. The bounce that many expected has not happened, in fact we are falling back and currently down over 4% on the day. The market has us pretty much pinned down for now.

If a buyer comes along then great but I don’t think it is a certainty. And Samsung has contested (and delayed) all litigation to date, so unless risk of NANO falling to an adversary is sufficient to change its view, we should expect more of same.

If NANO wanys to win it needs to become a going concern business, which means more orders from Wah Hong and Careware and hopefully new ones too (possibly even Apple).

Litigation with Samsung can run its course independently and if we win, I am confident the courts will view Samsung’s actions in a very poor light and award significant damages.

In the absence of a purchase or deal the next step as you say MR BWM is to sort funding out. However, yesterday’s self inflicted wounds might just just be the excuse needed to dilute existing shareholders to much smaller holdings when it arrives?

One way or another, the PI’s have been worked over, again.

You could add Dow DuPont to the list too, as well as Merck, although they have no factory. One conspiracy theory I have heard says Samsung has found ways to hold everyone back whilst it rushed NANO processes into production to create QLED - just saying!

Who knows mcsquares, but the RNS was of NANO's making, so self inflicted. I placed two modest purchases today at 15p and 13.2p and initially I was unable to buy any and my orders were not filled until the price had reached my limit for at least 5 minutes. Not sure if anyone else experienced the same but it might indicate buyers in the background?