Member Info for FlyingHigher

Noel Edmonds and Mr Blobby have been appointed non-executive directors to elevate Nanoco to commercialisation!

The leadership of Nanoco are vulnerable here, but let's stave off a coup.

The way to succeed is through careful strategy and delivery.

Unlike some, I felt the proposal to go private was an attempt to reduce transparency.

Crucially it rendered the shares worthless in practice as few investors search the OTC markets - most avoid them!

Let's move on and hope Nanoco can announce some development in the sensing market and progress on the takeover front, if they choose that path.

However, I put the disturbing question out there again:

Are Nanoco worthless?

They have no presence in display and no exclusivity in sensing.

If you think big fish will save Nanoco now, having tried to screw them up for years, you have have more faith than me.

This lack of exclusivity will make it much easier to destroy Nanoco.

Therefore, the end will probably come at some point.

A sobering thought to end on.

No not at all, I like to see others do well. My reasons for staying away are grounded and I've pursued a lower risk investment strategy with small, steady returns. This feels like an Enron.

Pikers makes the salient point here.

This feels a bit suspicious to me.

Medpal are in a non-exclusive highly competitive market that any of us could make a company in.

This news is a general development for the market, but doesn't say anything at all about MedPal.

It's almost as if they're deliberately generating hype.

I think we have to be careful.

This is why I sold the other day.

That was unfortunate because I've missed the rise today, but this company may not be worth much, if anything at all.

This is all good PR today, but it doesn't mean anything until there's a proven link between this approval and increased revenue for the company.

They still need to demonstrate value.

You get beer tokens at the casino and might meet some nice people there too.

It's possible this could be boosted by an II buying to push the vote through with a back hander afterwards.

That won't benefit PIs.

Vote no!!!

Nigwit is a plant!

Vote No!

This arrangement will not serve you well!

Where are the people who pumped this rubbish? This is a terrible investment that will go horribly wrong

I just sold out and moved into ETFs.

I made an insignificant profit - basically break even.

I'm changing my investment strategy to create more space in my head.

Good luck all!

Wrong button - STRONG BUY!

The ceiling is blowing!

I'm seriously impressed with this update. I think the gap to the 40p research note valuation should start to close.

We all hope it closes completely of course! :)

I would prefer an AIM listing to preserve flexibility for shareholders in the interim. If the company don't come up with something over the next few years, they probably never will anyway and it will be over. All the matched bargaining facility does for us is makes our shares very difficult to realise value from. I wonder if Nanoco became unstuck when they realised they had also infringed Shoei's IP. Their bargaining plan was left in tatters. Pure speculation of course!

Sol Gold raised loads of money at 1p, then struck gold and sent their share price to 40p. Investors were cheesed off at the raise, but not so cheesed off when the shares rocketed on news of a JV.

AIM companies need money and good ones provide growth so as they grow the money is absorbed to preserve a profit for those who get in at a good price. We have funds for the next phase, which should prove value. Once value is proven, equity is raised at a higher price hopefully. The prospect of a raise shouldn't deter investors in AIM companies because generally companies list on AIM to raise cash. It's kind of the point of AIM.

If the company delists, it's possible that the share exchange mechanism will be terminated.

Then the question is: Is it guaranteed for your shares to be given a split of any buyout?

I believe the protection is removed and I can't see what obligation they have to pay shareholders.

I really don't understand this process.

If they are obligated to retain the shares and those shares will be paid their percentage of the sale, I could understand shareholders voting for this.

Of course, there's still a risk that there won't be a sale and you're left with shares that are extremely difficult to trade.

Terrorwit, it's risky because the match bargain facility will get low traction and the market will be dead for trading. I've been involved in trading for many years and this is the first I've read about OTC trading. I imagine many others haven't heard of it, so on this basis my assumption is our shares will be near impossible to trade, leaving us at the mercy of any offer. It disempowers holders.

The point is delisting is extremely risky for shareholders who are being asked to vote for it, so you're voting for the demise of your own investment Terrorwit. I don't know why you would do that. Are you a philanthropic investor? If so, you must have lost a lot of money!

Brian please give us a Tenner (after our shares go bust)