Member Info for ddubya

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?

Hi Catiche. As NANO is in an ‘Offer’ period my understanding is that Directors and Insiders are prevented from buying or selling at all, except with the relevant permission from the ‘Panel’, which they would not grant in all but the most exceptional of circumstances.

Going back to the RNS, I find the emphasis on short term funding interesting. It states NANO is looking at ”... possible sources of additional funding for the Company which include some short term commercial opportunities,..” . Specific reference to short term funding might indicate NANO expectation that long term funding may not be necessary? Probably clutching at straw but I suppose it is possible there could be income stream due from a new contract or Wah Hong?

I am no lawyer Nanonano but the term ‘party’ or ‘parties’ is commonplace in contracts to describe those who would enter into it, so unless an individual was making a bid on their own account they would not be referred to as a ‘party’. Much more likely the term is used to describe entities that are corporates.

jplay. Yes what a journey and all LTH need a virtual cuddle.

I take comfort from knowledge that NANO technology probably has been commercialised (by Samsung) although they would prefer not to pay for it. And, We still have interested parties. Admittedly, If they are Maplins and Careware, all is lost but it could include Apple, LG and the Chinese, in which case not much has changed today - other than the share price.

You could well be right researcher - but just as I read your good advice, my order got filled.

I promise not to spend more though:)

You could be right Mr BWM and if so I stand corrected!

I tried to buy more this morning myself but just missed out on filling an order at 15p

Certainly possible Mr BWM as well as the remaining parties, whoever they are.

Can’t imagine RG is too pleased today, now that most of his profit has disappeared too. First taste of NANO surprise for him but his investment decision might still be good longer term.

I take balman’s point on the ‘emptiness’ of the RNS, another NANO speciality. Possibly ME felt the need to provide the market in some way but any suggestion of downside and the market will put you to sacrifice.

The RNS seems clear on the more than one point Nanonano, as follows:
'' The Company is continuing to engage with a number of parties to establish whether they are prepared to make such a proposal.'' They have not notified NANO that they have terminated interest at least, although it is the case that we do not have any measure for the extent of their interest.

Not long to wait until Mr Market provides his opinion.

I agree that a cash call is more likely Nanonano but it should not infer a good offer will not be made by one of the remaining parties - the most serious bidders.

Thanks Morbox. It is now clear there were quite a number of interested parties and that more than one remains. Interesting that NANO makes a point about potential withdrawal from the process? Not news of a big payday but not of bad news either, just more delays for now. And it keeps the pressure on Samsung meantime

That would be good common sense Itsamaybe/ Hawi. NANO would be more than satisfied with a retrospective licencing arrangement, and that 's all would need to see the share price soar. However, I sense that Samsung and other would rather own the process and patents lock, stock and barrel.

Anyone else notice that Hargreaves Lansdown is showing NANO up 15.74% on the day (3.4p) with a 24.8p bid and 25p offer. These differ from the LSE values but I am not sure why? Mistake perhaps but either way a very decent day. Since this is NANO, I shall not dare to expect news, so I shall not disappointed when/if there is not.

Had all interest in NANO evaporated, I believe an RNS would be required, although I do not think it would be necessary each time an interested party falls away or is discounted. That is probably why the RNS announcing discussion with interested parties was not specific on numbers.

Coronavirus is a further complication (as if we need one) but in time its effects on the stock market will pass and normality will return for those of us fortunate to either avoid or survive it.

You need to believe to invest here but given the complexities involved and the difficulty in extracting fair value, it should not be a surprise that DD has taken this length of time. You need to be a firm believer to invest here!

Coronavirus is killing almost all high risk stocks unfortunately. And unless there is a bid for NANO this position might persist for quite some time to come. I

I do find Samsung's continued silence interesting. Either it has the killer answer and is keeping its powder dry, or more likely I suspect, it is involved in what are likely to be complex discussions. I don't see NANO parting with its crown jewels for a modest sum and ME will want as much as the can extract. Suits me, but we shall need to hold out and accept both that it might take some time and risk that events do not go in our favour.

That article is particularly interesting Screenlearner because Samsung has been found guilty of ‘deliberately’ infringing patents, so a parallel with NANO’s case.
Is it possible that Apple is helping out to deck Samsung?

I have a feeling one option NANO may favour is to reach agreement to settle the Display argument with Samsung (via a licence arrangement), yet continue to develop the other product lines it can bring to the market. An interesting possibility might be sell relevant IP to Samsung with the caveat that NANO can licence it for use in non TV products at £zero cost. That might offer a solution for all?

Irrespective of who makes the CFQD for Samsung, no one knows what molecular seeding looks like better than NANO and we can be sure they have been looking inside Samsung’s QLED TV, so I have a high level of confidence this will go our way (despite obvious risks).

That’s interesting Mr BWM I have tried with HL, which does not have any restriction on the % of limit sale price over current.