We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
All - one of the tranches he bought was almost exactly £20k in value. Seems like he sold first to bed and Isa if he had used any ISA allowance this year. Still don’t know why the sell wasn’t 72k shares though.
“You are so scared of me because I am the mirror.” is possibly the most self-indulgent phrase I’ve ever heard.
Will you start referring to yourself in the third person soon? Would be nicely relevant given your three profiles.
Yes and the same reports that set out that “as well as the time value of money (bearing in mind that based on the Group’s WACC an award of, say, US$500m in six years’ time would only be worth c.US$200m in today’s money).”
So 5 to 6 years of delays could land us the equivalent of just $50m more than was settled.
Frustratingly I keep finding myself agreeing with Gig!!
If you appoint management for a £2m turnover company, on £2m turnover company packages and NOT a post litigation growth business then I wonder what the outcome will be?! Totally self-fulfilling!
Fair point troublesome. I don’t know. That’s why I’m not calling for BT to be burnt at the stake like many here. But I’m also not slapping his back saying that it was the best negotiation and that we should all be delighted.
I’m waiting to hear more about what led to the decision to settle at £70m for Nano and understand the impact on the organic business in the near term.
Very true. Just like the period between the infamous Monday RNS and settlement RNS - everyone here has strong opinions grounded in very little knowledge.
We don’t know what happened behind the closed doors, we don’t know what led to Nanoco deciding that settlement at $150m was the best course of action. What pressures were at play etc.
All of this “we’ve been shafted, it’s criminal” rhetoric is a massive overreaction in my eyes.
@henry - really??
LOAM - probably smashed through their profit targets by making the sales in early Jan and they are still sitting pretty with 12% of the company! Why would they need to load up with more?? They’ve stopped selling - holding 12% is hardly a sign that they don’t trust management or that this is a sinking ship!
As for Tariq, on LinkedIn he describes himself as dealing with “ Opportunistic Credit, Litigation Finance, and Special Situations Investments” - someone clearly who specialises in these types of situations and who would have seen litigation outcomes of all types. Someone who is probably better informed than either you or I (or anyone else on this board - no offence!)
“Considering Nanoco’s own low case damages model (which was detailed and explored in numerous court papers some months back) of US$48.0m, TPI considers last Friday’s negotiated outcome to be very positive for shareholders. This takes on board all risks associated with continuing to pursue the case in hope of an improved final result (which would potentially have exposed them to an extended appeals process along with, ultimately, the possibility of losing at trial etc., as well as the time value of money (bearing in mind that based on the Group’s WACC an award of, say, US$500m in six years’ time would only be worth c.US$200m in today’s money).”