Member Info for FlyingHigher

I accept I don't know what the norm is for emerging markets, but it would be highly coincidental if Nanoco reach commercialisation as soon as they get new leadership.

With the new leadership, Nanoco shareholders will finally be able to answer the question: Was it the leadership or a technological flaw that prevented commercialisation in the past?

The clear hint that there are likely to be more customers coming on board soon is not something we saw under the previous leaders.

Personally, I've always felt Nanoco were lead by great scientists with poor business acumen.

Now we will see.

Sony are a huge brand :D

12p close come on! :D

Knowing Nanoco it will fall back down to 9p :D

It will be the same as last time.

The no win clause doesn't matter because Nanoco will almost certainly win.

Yes and long term holders face the difficult choice over whether to average down to potentially reduce losses whilst also increasing risk.

Oh yh I misread that, they are not cash flow positive! But there is loads of cash remaining on current burn rate and more to come from LG. Then next calendar year, the revenues are expected to increase. We've heard all this before though.

Nanonano - I agree with your speculative calculations.

Nanoco could retain something in the region of £15m.

£30m in cash would be sensational.

This may not be the last lawsuit either.

How would a bid around £40m be appealing for a cash flow positive business with a new business venture just announced, who have £15.5m in the bank, IP valued at £46m by accounts, and a lawsuit that will almost certainly result in some form of additional cash? Your only logic is "the current share price." That's not a basis for valuation. Markets get shares wrong, look at Tesla.

The reason the Samsung case was so high risk was that it posed a risk to Nanoco's IP integrity. Having been proven to be 100% robust, the risk of this legal case is very low. Whilst the damages are lower, the board have also stated repeatedly that they will only pursue legal action where it is economically worthwhile. The depressed share price no longer makes any sense.

Kooba - that's illogical. A lot has changed and the market has grasped it. Nobody knows the value of LG infringement apart from them, and Nanoco will have some idea. Then there's the value of preventing Nanoco falling into the wrong hands. None of this can possibly be reflected in the share price.

Nanoco will only pursue infringement economically worthwhile so we're probably talking tens of millions here.

With the infringement case and prospect of losing IP, it begs the question: how much will LG or competitors be willing to pay?

It's not when you consider the IP value, the operational business, the cash, and the litigation.

Stupid adverts on this site messed up my message.

I cynically believe the sales process is aimed at forcing LG's hand. What is the most amount of money we can get in the least amount of time?

The worrying part for long-term holders is what is now considered an acceptable offer?

A premium from here of course but perhaps not that great. I still, perhaps foolishly, maintain my 30p prediction.

None of us have any knackers left. We lost them to Nanoco years ago.

I believe the activities are ramping up to present a strong pitch for a sale.

However, I cynically believe the sale proc

No but anything is a bonus at this stage. It helps takeover discussions. It further validates Nanoco's IP portfolio and future value. Say they get £10m, that takes them to £25.5m cash and with all other assets makes a target of around 30p look really sensible.

The market currently values Nanoco at £16m. They have £15.5m in cash and are cash flow positive.

They have a huge patent portfolio covering future QD development not just the expiring patents of the past.

An accounting exercise valued IP at £46m. - That's pretty arbitrary, but it's the best we have.

Then they have 2 on-going business ventures with Asian chemical companies and a new lawsuit, which has reached the point to be considered economically worthwhile.

46 + 15.5 + extra assets like facilities and organic business operations + Settlement.

Value is defined by what someone is willing to pay obviously but extrapolate £70m from best estimates seems realistic, probably pessimistic if anything.

As for a takeover, Nanoco are not a distressed seller, so they have the opportunity to leverage any interest for the benefit of shareholders.

My target remains 30p.

This will go up if they launch another lawsuit, which is also possible.

As for the new litigation I suspect LG are a central part of the infringing supply chain, covering Nanosys and possibly others.

TerrorWit - Am I being unrealistic here?

Yes exactly! What is the cost to LG of say Phillips buying Nanoco. There could be a bidding war.

We can speculate but I suspect Samsung fancied their chances at finding some loophole in the patents. We know this will not be possible for LG. The Nanoco Patent profile is 100% robust. LG now have to ask themselves, do they want to enter into a protracted legal dispute that they will definitely lose OR buy Nanoco at an attractive price? The latter would be much cheaper in the long-run and give them access to everything Nanoco has. It's a no brainer.

The offer would have to appease majority shareholders, so I would say something in the region of £70m is completely realistic.

This isn't clear cut because Nanoco are very good at developing new patents. There are also patents for future QD development. It's irrelevant to historic breaches. Nanoco is now primed for an LG takeover in any case. I consider some form of offer very likely. It could surprise a few and show how badly wrong the market has got this.

"The promised dividend never arrived." Yes it did in the buy back at 24p and the reduction in shares. That's the best way to return money to investors. Dividends cause a huge crash. OK Nanoco crashed anyway, but they're now in a position to really push onto higher prices with so few shares in issue.