Member Info for HenryHistorian

@MattyBoy: Please no goading of others. Yesterday was not a good day for this board so let us leave it at rest.
Regarding mediation: I am sure that the talks will not be easy so last minute settlement is my hunch.
Sitting tight on my holdings and looking forward to August and September.

Ok everyone just stop it. This is just too childish.
Let’s keep to arguments regarding Nanoco and everyone please refrain from barbed comments aimed at each other - ok?

@Screenlearner: If I recall correctly Griffith reduced his holdings already just days away from the PTAB ruling in May which went Nanoco’s way so I am pretty sure he has no additional insight.

Doesn’t make sense to me but each to his own.

@Hawi and Feeks: Genuinely appreciated your common sense posts this morning with which I broadly agree.
@Hawi: I would say that Samsung in the case of a verdict against them will be under considerable pressure to settle. Nanoco would pretty immediately go after them in other jurisdictions and try to get injunctions there.
Let’s face it: Samsung is a global giant and if S management wants to behave like a spoilt brat it can do so but the bill for them will just get bigger and bigger. And even if they appeal S will be in such a big hole that they will not be able to crawl out - just delaying the inevitable.
I as an investor am happy to hold here…Once the verdict comes in positive in September and even if S appeals I would be comfortable to hold….as pay day will eventually come.

Dear all, Just wanted to share that I am really disappointed and saddened by the tone on this board today. I really don’t understand the aggressiveness here. From what I gather we are all invested in Nanoco and believe in Nanoco’s case and a good outcome for the company and us investors.
The current bickering is childish and adds nothing absolutely nothing to the debate.

@Lee: Can we stop gutter language. I can understand the frustration that Micro Focus shareholders must feel (and I share some of this pain) but let’s keep it civil here.
Personally I think Micro Focus will climb out of this hole but it will be a slow climb.

Well I continue to hold strongly - no point in selling out so close to the finishing line. In my opinion one should only have bought into Nanoco in the first place in recent times if one believed in their story and the validity of their IP and case against Samsung. If one had this belief it does not make sense to sell out.
I am still puzzled by the LOAM transaction but realise that due to confidentiality I will never know the exact background to it.
So in the end it is down to me whether my belief in Nanoco’s case is strong enough and in the American justice system - I affirm both.

Personally I don’t like it a bit that LO are selling and especially so close to September. Am I missing something here?

@Barbon: I do trust BT and have a significant exposure to Nanoco. My concern was more whether Samsung in return for a decent settlement would try to insist on confidentiality- so as not to give ideas to other future companies that will take them to court.

I think this is my concern: Do we as investors have the right to learn the terms (meaning here the financial details/numbers not the actual text) of the settlement if there was one?
To be honest knowing that there has been a settlement without any concrete numbers would put me off….I trust BT but if I have to wait until the next annual update that would not be attractive.

@hellojello: Please no. Samsung cannot be trusted. Let us recoup the cash and license fee that is due to Nanoco and that should be the end of the relationship with Samsung.

@Nanonano: If a settlement happens without transparency on the payments from Samsung to Nanoco this would have an adverse impact on the share price as the market would simply not know what valuation would be just.

@BlahBlahDo: BT has been very clear that he wants the realisation of fair value for Nanoco and if Samsung get a licence BT will insist that a license is taken out for the full duration of Nanoco’s patent duration

I read through the two bios of the two lawyers from Ward, Smith & Hill and rather like them - clearly experienced lawyers and with good longstanding activity in Texas.
We continue to be in good hands.

@Nanogeddon: I will sell only in September - and depending on the outcome regarding future license money streams only partially.

@Nanogeddon: Sorry but you leave me really puzzled. Why does this thing, ie share price need rescuing. Nothing absolutely nothing has changed with regard to Nanoco’s business and commercialisation prospects nor the court case.
Nanoco management and legal team will not make the amount they want to see dependent on the share price but on the amount of TVs sold with Nanoco’s IP plus future license agreement.
I remain convinced (but note this is just my personal opinion and might not be a correct one) that the share price will be in the 70s/80s after settlement or court trial.
I repeat anyone selling now needs his or her head examined.

@Skeletor: No idea. My only educated guess is that it is a combination of one investor still offloading for whatever reason and maybe buyers reluctant to buy in a weakening overall market.
I hold strongly here as the settlement or court decision is totally uncorrelated to the market.

Yes all strange- I would have thought that such a trade would lead to a massive drop in share price - especially compared to the modest sales on Monday which triggered a massive decline. However today the share price barely declines at all.

This is a board about Nanoco and not Afghanistan or Afghan girls.
However I will add my two pence here: It really is up to the Afghan people to make Afghanistan work - for all Afghans. Instead we have tribal conflicts, widespread corruption and now absolutely backward leadership. The Afghan people had a chance (and billions of dollars from the west) but blew it.
Sorry other countries had a colonial past but developed after the British left so colonialism is now a poor excuse.