Member Info for GIVMESUNSHINE

Getting ready for the fight ... cant wait for the trail to start ... Well worth reading back the investor presentation.. We are going to court to prove willfull infringment on 5 claims only from 47 .. and that is chosen by us.. Samsung may well let this go to trail .. but as alluded to withi the presentation .. whilst even if samsung lost, they could apeal / drag it out .. it would open other areas such as europe for injunctions on sale of QD TV's .. One thing that it dont quite get is that this whole trial will be done within a week .. I assume all the work is in the prep and dockets we are seeing now...

Rocky moment and Creed is just realising he understimated his opponent..GLA

its still not that easy to buy .. not really that many selling either .. to small mkt cap for this amount of growth

ok Fair point - pressure has come from somewhere - perhaps the aquired comapnies not that happy - SH certainly cant be, and J didnt have any skin in the game .. This could be a great recovery play if they can get thier BOD act together .. revenues up and margins up at a very impressive rate .. cash burn low .. SP down 80% -90% - not a mix you see that often .. Charm offensive / news coming IMO .. J knew he was going the day after that news IMO

Just occurred to me - I bet the resignation of J is linked to the convertible loan - isn’t the loan holder a major shareholder ? If so I’m sure he is saying “I’m foooked if I giving a convertible loan @25p after you’ve just killed the SP to 7p - one condition - you quit and I’ll honour it / extend a a new loan on amended terms - RNS in a few days - that’s what I would do !

Those unclear results - causing the SP to crash - then followed a week later with a great update was a right balls up that have cost investors money - glad he’s gone

I think you may be right - not many people interested in selling at these levels - Which give the volume yesterday is surprising - think this will go blue myself

Agree however have just over £700k as of yesterday including the drawdown - so with margin and revenue going up as they are i dont think funding is the key concern - it will be need for more growth at some point next year , but the number speak forthemselves - I think they were poorly presented in the results - Hence , as ive seen posted - £1.7 Turnover £4.7MIL LOSS - 280K LEFT Ha Ha etc but if you read the accounts this is going really well - no one read past the first sentence IMO

Morning -the combination of growth in both revenue and margin has a big effect .. H1 21 ?837k at 38 Percent margin giving a gross profit of ?318k - H1 22 ?1.9mil at 61% gives a gross profit of ?1.16 million for H1 - and increase of about 250% over last year .. overheads were well in check and net cash although low is only £100k less than at the new year

I think PI's saw £4.7million overheads and 700k cash and got manipluated into selling out.. but admin costs were only 1.2 million , rest it one off share based and transactions costs, the company isnt burnig mush cash at all. There is nothing in todays RNS that wasnt said in the results - other than comfimation of some pretty impressive numbers Q2 that were illuded to in the results and the presentation ...Growth will increase the cost base , but there is plently of room and time IMO this should be pushing 30p - even then it would only have £7mil mkt cap

loss

They didnt - PI's just **** themselves without reading the accounts ...

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/987140/cornerstone-fs-hails-record-first-half-with-significant-growth-hitting-all-markers-987140.html

I reckon a bit more than that as the aquistions placing would have kept some back .. so im thinking £300k ish - but even so... with margin and revenue growth at those rates .. plus they have access to 7OOK including loan - they may well neec cash to fund some grown - but it priced like a dying company -

Ok - Cheers - they were onboard late, its look like today is clearing that up - why not issue this update with the reslts - im grateful for the chance to get in sub 10p - but wouldnt be pleased if i had sold on new only a week ago - even after this rise stil looks like it was a false fall amplified by seniment and 25p is on the cards in short order IMO

I dont see the massive overheads - looking at the accounts if you strip out transcation and sharebased payments and depreciation - overheads for staff and admin are only £1,152,844 for full year - Only got £100k less cash now than at dec 2021 - OK they raised £870k for aqusition, assume some oof that has been used , but this isnt buring though millions and with that growth will be EBITDA positive very soon possibly already IMO .. although TBF ive only been reading up this morning

Gonna get busy now .. Alaot to get thorugh over the next 4 weeks - unless anything changes - only 9 weeks to trial

next deadlines: (thanks to HAWI)
- July 14, 2022: serve pretrial disclosures (witness list, deposition designations, exhibit list
- July 21, 2022: serve objections to pretrial disclosures
- July 25, 2022: file notice of request for daily transcript or real time reporting
- July 28, 2022: serve objections to rebuttal pretrial disclosures, file motions in limine
- August 9, 2022: File joint pretrial or (joint proposed jury instructions, joint proposed verdict form responses to motions in limine, updated exhibit lists, updated witness lists...)
- August 12, 2022: notify court of agreements reaching during meet and confer: parties are ordered to meet and confer on outstanding objections and shall advice the court of any agreements reached latest by 1 pm
- August 15, 2022: if a juror questionnaire is to be used, an editable questionnaire shall be jointly submitted to the deputy clerk in charge
- August 18, 2022: pretrial conference: August 18: 8 at 10.30 am and August 19: 9 am before Judge Gilstrap
- September 12, 2022: Jury selection 9 am and show time!

Nano response Attachment contain the following.

AN INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.
OVERVIEW OF NANOPARTICLE SYNTHESIS METHODS (about 10 Pieces of evidence ref)
PRPOPOSED GROUND FOR REJECTION (About 12 referenced QD Therum documents)
THE PETITION SHOULD BE DENIED BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE REQUIRED REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS OF PROVING CHALLENGED CLAIMS UNPATENTABLE
CONCLUSION (cant be seen)
TABLE OF AUTHORITES (Legal Case studies and PTAB Cases)

Agree - but unusually you can open the attachment with the response - quoting their head line - technical arguments and referenced case studies .. only the titles with defence but there’s a lot in there ..

If you click on attahcments - look like the full responce is accessible (barring the attached eveidence, ive cutnpaste it into work but wouldnt post it..seem that Samsung are thriwing all efforts into stopping the trial and Nanco have a long detailed responce why the judge shouldnt ..

Really ? Where did you find that ?

Nice way of putting it .. I bet your not far off - sounds like the Tory’s policy statement