Member Info for Ecclescake

President have spent multi millions on 2D & 3D. Not only is the drill rig questionable mechanically, but I'm not convinced the drill teams abilities based on the last drill. I vaguely recall local unions insisted on using Paraguayan labour. I think there's multiple issues we aren't hearing about, that's caused this to be a year later that originally proposed.

Old article, but I'm not sure if it's valid. A couple of other links lower down.
https://www.newelectronics.co.uk/content/news/nanoco-and-plessey-partner-to-shrink-full-colour-microled-pixels-using-quantum-dots

Just click on director deals to learn everything you need to know about the BOD

Not sure about relationship, Plessey came on the scene at the same time as Apple. I assumed that there could have been a 3 way project based on the connected projects in glasses. Apple pulled the plug and Plessey became very secretive about supply chains. I have watched for a link, as I still think Plessey are using Nanocos cfqd, but never seen hard evidence.

Back when Apple we're on the scene
Plessey we're using Nanoco cfqd to develop their technology
https://plesseysemiconductors.com/technology/

"Before"

I thought Samsung agreed not to appeal the PTAB to allow it to proceed the court case.

News on this drilling going to the last day or not as the case maybe, bizarre carry-on.
Planning for our Paraguay exploration well is progressing with positive news as to the rig expected before the end of this month at which time we will be able to project a spud date.

Bit more detail in this article which gives us hope of spudding this year, fingers crossed. Dated 16 September 22
https://en.mercopress.com/2022/09/16/drilling-in-search-of-oil-in-paraguay-to-continue

Looks and feels primed for news on Paraguay in the next few days.
Planning for our Paraguay exploration well is progressing with positive news as to the rig expected before the end of this month at which time we will be able to project a spud date.

Should give it a boost. We'll a slight flit at least.

Iofina plc, specialists in the exploration and production of iodine and manufacturers of specialty chemical products, is pleased to announce that it has now executed all agreements with a new brine supply partner to construct its latest IOsorb(R) iodine plant, IO#9, in Western Oklahoma.
This region of Western Oklahoma is an area of significant oil and gas development with a consequent growing brine supply. The Board believes that the site provides an excellent location for Iofina's newest plant, which will employ IOsorb(R) technology to isolate iodine from the iodine-rich brine stream which is co-produced during our partner's oil and gas production. Iofina anticipates expanding iodine production in this region to create a new core area for the Company and is actively developing plans for a second plant in this area.
To minimise supply chain impacts and expedite IO#9's construction, the Company pre-ordered major items and secured contractors in advance. The Company will also relocate the equipment from IO#5 as part of its building plans. The Company remains mindful of the impact of supply chain issues, but currently anticipates a construction time of six months, after which Iofina will be operating six iodine production plants in Oklahoma. Once in operation, IO#9 will immediately contribute to cash flow. Full payback of its costs expected in less than two years with production of crystalline iodine targeted between 100 to 150 metric tonnes ("MT") per annum. Additionally, as previously announced in July this year, Iofina obtained a term loan from its banking partner to support this project.
In the third quarter of this year ("Q3"), at the Company's five IOsorb(R) production facilities in Oklahoma, Iofina Resources produced 143.0 MT of crystalline iodine. This production is in line with the Company's expectations and Iofina is on track to produce 255-275 MT of crystalline iodine in the second half of this year.
Commenting, President and CEO Dr. Tom Becker, stated: "We are delighted to have agreed on the terms to construct our newest iodine plant, IO#9, in Western Oklahoma, enabling us to move forward with our next growth phase. With our current IOsorb(R) facilities operating at expected rates, the addition of IO#9 will deliver a major step change in our overall iodine production.
"IO#9's construction will be underway shortly, whilst the relocating of the decommissioned IO#5 plant will help to both accelerate the project and keep costs down. The current timeline will see IO#9 online in approximately six months. We look forward to updating the market on the progress of construction in due course."

Other way to look at this could be is not to consider Samsung, but what the best outcome for Nanoco. This court case whatever the outcome isn't going to change Samsungs approach, they have a tried and tested business model to achieve market dominance. One thing that would change that is public opinion, but the tech buying public don't care or even stop to think where or how this technology gets to market. The best out come is Nanoco get a ruling that thier IP is solid and there is a award for damages ideally not giving Samsung a strong reason to appeal, the faster it ends the better for us, as then nanoco can get on an monetise the IP. Hitting Samsung with a multiple X3 for willful infringement is only going to drag this out longer as its stronger grounds for appeal.
Once we get confirmation of commercialisation of other QDs the importance of the trial will diminish, I'm sure.

I think it's become clear what Samsungs modus operandi is now. They had a number of routes open when they set out to take the IP to produce CFQD. Had Nanoco failed they could have picked up all the IP for next to nothing, Nanoco survived and found legal funding taking Samsung to task, closing one of Samsungs options. The legal option plays to Samsungs advantage by putting the IP into limbo, because no business would take the risk using IP. Samsung have a clear runway to market share dominance with unique technology. That's why they are content to extend the resolution for as long as possible. It was intesting to see BT fire at salvo directly to Samsung in the preliminary results
'Interest has been re-energised in our CFQDs for use in displays. This reflects the gradually increasing number of panel makers seeking cadmium free solutions and also reflects the strong underpinning of Nanoco's IP provided by the PTAB decisions earlier this year.'
That paragraph wasn't for the market, that was aimed directly at Samsung.
Samsung aren't bothered about the trial out come, in a perverse way they can't loose it just a question of how much money they are going to make.

Take a look at https://home.kpmg/au/en/home/creditors/salt-lake-potash.html
Let me know what you make of the 3rd October letter, Deed of Company Arrangement. I'm not clear what arrangements have been entered into, doesn't look like a sale.

I'm expecting notice of results RNS next week for year end 31 July 2022.
It got moved around last year from 20 Oct to early Nov. Trial shouldn't impact presentation, could be interesting to see how it's dealt with.
FYI I'm in the 'we're going to trial' camp :)

Twitter
https://twitter.com/MolecularEn?t=CRrA8K5T-aNkBKJmOjyMJQ&s=09

A guess might be the speculative buying before the interims and subsequent selling after the interims didn't deliver could be leverage trades which had to settle by the end of September have returned for the Q3 update due possibly next week.
The last information on IO9 was very precise on timings. Usually a plant takes 6 months to build, previously we're told that should be shortened due to pre ordering long lead time items and the reusing IO5 parts. Dates don't match up at the moment, as IO9 commission is 9 months away.

You have a choice, take the red pill

I should have included this article as well.
https://en.mercopress.com/2022/08/29/lithium-exports-gain-pace-in-argentina