Member Info for Feeks

Or perhaps the share price is a reflection of the abject failure of the Board? I recall you once opined that bulletin board posters do NOT have any influence on share price so which is it?

That is not correct, Nanonano . They said a settlement should be for fair value to reflect the worldwide IP both past and future. It was up to Nanoco what deal to agree. Any deal ought to have included a royalty for the reasons which have been set out below

My view was always that the Samsung litigation WAS the be all and end all for Nanoco, and so it proves. They should have gone for broke at trial before distiributing a massive special dividend at a multiple.of the paltry $150m they did end up taking. It beggars belief that anyone would still defend tbe choice that was made by the Board at the cost of long term retail holders. The Samsung litigation was the investment opportunity cake here - never the cherry - and they just folded, but for what? Terry has always judged things very badly and still cannot think rationally about his investment. He is deluded. Forever looking for excuses each time the company fails to meet its own over enthusiastic projections

There is no bounce. He will be very lucky.

Never thought I'd say this but I prefer reading posts by TerrorWit than the torrent of desperate posts of day trader-vultures like magmanus_49 who by now is probably realising that he has bought a dud

Today Nanoco does not have a viable business. I say this without any need for the benefit of hindsight. It capitulated on the settlement terms it tragically agreed with Samsung without taking anything remotely near "fair value" for its worldwide IP, both past and future, that Samsung stole from it in its multi-billion dollar rip-off. That was, and is likely always to remain, the best business Nanoco ever had. As a keen long term watcher and former investor of Nanoco I am not even remotely tempted to buy in at 9p levels. There is no easy profit to be made.

Valued at less than cash but don't forget this bit: Burning £6m per year!

Terry you continue to give bad advice because you are emotionally involved. The total opposite of what you believe to be. You must have sold those 7p shares as said you had sold out before the settlement news and then bought in afterwards at c.28p. You were properly chipper about that smart move.

You haven't learned anything Terry. Signs are that you are talking for management as if it is some kind of special privilege

This shows the brutal truth that TerrorWit and NGR are the utterly deluded ones. I've said it all before in the last two years of my posting history.

Turning to Labour's proposed ban on outside smoking I think this is overall positive for Supreme. Firstly, vaping fumes are less harmful. Good chance that vaping may escape the proposed ban. Secondly, in any event, people can surreptitiously vape in circumstances when they would not able to smoke - e.g. one cheeky puff / fewer signs of smoke dispersal. So maybe reason for people to take up vaping even if they do not intend to give up smoking at home.

"E-cigarettes do not burn tobacco and do not produce tar or carbon monoxide, two of the most damaging elements to health in tobacco smoke".

https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/government-plans-to-address-children-vaping/

It was the sound of our hopes disappearing down the plughole

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDWwHZFFWFY&t=1061s

1:00:42 to 1:01:24

".... even at the low end of things we think a modest outcome in the US only on the historical damages would be transformative for shareholder value however you measure that whether its in terms of our market cap today or whatever ........ but our view is on our assessment of damages at the low end its still transformative for shareholder value."

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDWwHZFFWFY&t=1061s

Take a good listen from 58:37 to 59:21

[of Edison] ".... so that's their estimate of lost revenue based I guess on a low interpretation of damages models or medium possibly. Yes it is US only and yes it is history only so again if you are using that as a baseline number you have to apply those multipliers for the future and the rest of the world."

TerrorWit - the company stooge with a miraculous grasp of niche US patent case law - but very little else

This time its on the shortlist for the Innovative Pack of the Year at The Grocer New Product and Packaging Awards. Industry leading panel of judges involved

Question: Is there a regulatory reason or precedent for a confidential settlement offer to be decided by shareholder vote? I am guessing not.

Https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x7s6O0k5Y0A

Https://www.planetanalog.com/how-saw-devices-wireless-asics-tackle-torque-sensing-challenge/