Member Info for Ecclescake

Yes, an extension is possible, but these lawyers have a lot of resources so I dont think they will be holding settlementup they would have ageed to 30 days. Clients have spanners. Do you think the numbers and the mechanism for the settlement were on the table some weeks before the 6th Jan, considering the trial was set for last year they were probably on the table back then. The 11 hour was the time for decision, a scenario was Nanoco had a tabled a settlement to which Samsung either agreed to or tabled a counter offer. Either which way a settlement term sheet was agreed on the 6th. I think that include $ and mechanism. They wouldn't have a settlement to sign as that would require detail and that's what has been happening since the 6th. I'd expect them to be burning the midnight oil on this and have it finished in time unless there is a spanner in the works. High chance of crossing the line on or before the deadline, IMHO.
From the 6th jan 'The Parties now have 30 days to agree the detailed terms of a binding agreement.'

Lombard might not be finished, buyers thinned out and Lombard have a bottom line around 37p born out by selling in the past 6 months. They may come back in on RNS selling into more strength.
A couple of posts today miss quote the expected outcome. 'The gross settlement value should be expected to be towards the lower end of the range of expectations for a successful jury trial outcome as previously guided by the Company.'
Towards the lower end of a jury award, that is an amount after guidelines given by the Judge born from figures given by Mintz and contested by Samsung.

Declared stances on the RNS of the 9th shows an Investment ethos.

Nanoco's latest patent 11552223 updates 9680068. 9680068 was part of the infringement case against Samsung.
The first page of patents covers a multitude of display applications. The implications in current and future partnerships are endless, it might have a bearing on current events. You would want to be shut out from access which may give you competitors an edge.
https://patents.justia.com/assignee/nanoco-technologies-ltd

So I'm I to understand you talk the settlement down from its Monday 9th price and after 14 days sell out. Decisive.

I'm haven't given a lot of weight to selling by Griffiths and Lombard, based on their timing and implementation. I realise that's presumptuous. The outcome of the settlement is something I haven't weighed high or low. My sights are set further away.

7 year agreement with Wah Hong finishes end 2023
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160722005524/en/Nanoco-Announces-7-Year-Supply-and-Licensing-Agreement-with-Leading-Display-Optical-Films-Manufacturer-Wah-Hong-Industrial-to-Market-Cadmium-free-Quantum-Dots

From annual report on royalties and licensing. Became problematic when they lost control via Samsung Hansol
Royalties
As well as the ability to make and sell
materials directly to our customers, the
agreements with our channel partners
(DuPont, Merck and Wah Hong) allow
them to manufacture our materials
themselves (or source from elsewhere
under further licences) and then pay a
royalty on the value of their sales to their
customers. This revenue stream has the
potential for very high leverage since
it is not constrained by Nanoco’s own
manufacturing scale and also has
minimal costs associated with
incremental sales via this channel.
Revenue potential: HIGH.
Licences
When a channel partner initially acquires
a right of access to or use of Nanoco
technology and IP, they typically pay a
one-off licence fee. These fees reflect
the costs already previously incurred by
Nanoco in developing our technology
and IP and hence represent a return on
those historical investments. Revenue
potential: LOW–MEDIUM.

Your right, Totally could be playing hard ball.
Tenders can be weighted between finance and quality and Totally were not content to continue in a unprofitable contract. No announcement Totally aren't in the running.

Coincidentally my post happened at the same time the sp increased.
I'll post more often ;)

I'm in.
Not as outrageous as some might think. Ambitions to be the largest iodine producer in the USA >1000 MTPA

TCL has confirmed at CES the release of its first TVs based on QD-OLED technology , arriving in the second half of 2023 . The Chinese giant did not want to share many other details: however, we will have the opportunity to speak shortly with Marek Maciejewski, TCL product development director for Europe, and we will certainly touch on the topic to possibly get some additional information. The QD-OLED panels will most likely be supplied by Samsung Display: the name of TCL was circulated at the end of 2020 among those who had received one of the first specimens for testing .
However, we like to remember that TCL itself had presented a very similar technology but made internally. We are talking about H-QLEDs , based on blue OLEDs flanked by electro-luminescent Quantum Dots (Electro Luminescent Quantum Dots) for the red and green components, in order to obtain pixels with an RGB structure. However, there has been no more news of these prototypes, which is why we believe it is rather unlikely that they will reach the market without any anticipation or indiscretion.
Source: TCL USA

Let's factor in Samsung $11 Billion factory and Nanoco will be paying them to use the tech. ;)
LG and others are already looking to leapfrog Samsung with the next (Nanoco Electroluminescent quantum dots.) technology.

Not sure what make of the latest RNS, doesn't clarify the previous at all.
'For legal reasons, Greenbrook Healthcare Limited ("Greenbrook"), the Group's wholly-owned subsidiary and part of Totally's Urgent Care Division, has today terminated its contracts for the provision of urgent treatment centres ("UTCs") at Northwick Park Hospital, Central Middlesex Hospital, Ealing Hospital and Hillingdon Hospital (the "Contracts"). The Contracts were due to expire on 31 January 2023.
In line with contractual terms, Greenbrook will continue to provide services at the UTCs in a safe, professional manner, until there is an orderly handover to a temporary provider. The safety of patients and wellbeing of staff, alongside business reputation, remain the Group's priority.'

Good point JB, factor in Samsung first mover advantage and market share, they may never leave the negotiation room :)
My limited experience of this is your legal team will have empirical knowledge of what is and is not going to be reasonable or acceptable. Saying 'that's not fair' doesn't work. Most of the settlement will be reversed from what a successful court trial could be, sort of that's the benchmark.

Someone talking nonsense there are a lot of people trying engage and it just encourages more nonsense.

Samsung gave up exclusivity, I'm not sure it was ever on the table, when they started using the IP. Nanoco cfqd related to the IP are out in the marketplace. The genie is out of the bottle.
I suspect Samsungs outlook when they decided to use this tech was very much influenced by not being able to control usage of the technology because it would have been available from DOW to everyone. Had Samsung used DOW they would have lost first mover advantage and that could be part of the fee recovery, I'd certainly try for it.

Low end was the only method really because Samsung wouldn't be able to cover sales by the companies they supply ie Sony. They were only going to accept royalties on something they could control and that is the ex works price of a cfqd panel. They may be getting the category description wrong high, med, low, because these are methods of calculation for example 1% of high end sales might be the same or simular to 5% of medium and 7.5% of low. I haven't put much thought into those percentages only for illustration. Trying to impose royalties on the sales of finished tv was never going to fly and could have been used just to get a mega $ figure in the juries mind.
Calculating royalties on this is going to be challenging, variable rates could be included to take into account the price premium of new tech to end of life tech. The variable thought is life can be multiple.
Almost like old times :)

Bit more progress
https://twitter.com/MolecularEn/status/1616084458528022531?t=2uBmpVBXZZ8BGOqzGLy2gw&s=19

https://www.kisco.co/
used to have shares in nanoco 10 years ago.