Member Info for HenryHistorian

@Trickymatters: You are getting ridiculous.

First of all any decent investor does not look at his screen and says "Hi buys to sells are coming up 7:1 today" as to make such a statement with just ca 90 minutes of trading on one bog standard trading day is really meaningless.

But maybe I go down to your level and giove you some other data to mull over...like share price performance...

Here we go:

YTD: -61%

Month: -3.5%

And even today: -0.57%

You call me a troll which I am not. I will ot call you any names except to publicly state here that you have no idea about investing.

@Ecclescake: Hahaha - That is another joke.

I would have been as “well informed” (or should I say intentionally MISS informed) as Tenner did to Nanoco shareholders in 2022?

@Ecclescake: I am working and quite frankly I won’t waste any of my holiday days engaging with a deceitful and insincere CEO. I voted to get Tenner removed and so have done my bit.

What I will not do however is to allow people to paint as the CEO as squeaky clean when it should be clear that for many months he has systematically misled investors- got it now?

&NGR: Yes Tenner said that - it is on video and Iwatched the recording ca 2-3 times last year.

@NGR: I have worked in asset management for ca 20 years so don’t try to patronise me here.

I am fully aware that investing comes with risks and that there are more black swans than we would like to believe.

In Nanoco’s case we have a CEO who has stated categorically that he would only accept a settlement if that would lead to a multiples of value - and he said this when the share price was substantially higher than it is now.

The way LOAM was massively dumping shares after the first now infamous RNS is quite revealing.

Oh and the notion that TH’s attempt to hold Tenner and CO to account would have any impact on the timeline of commercialisation is ridiculous.

I studied History at Cambridge but maybe I should have read English….

I guess why I am so worked up is that in the middle of last year I was thinking/questioning LOAM actions but as someone who has worked in the City myself I thought that nothing untoward would happen.

Obviously there are some differences in regard to ethical and proper comportment between asset management companies in the City.

But I leave it at these general remarks. I think everyone should have a good idea what happened.

@NGR: Fair enough it is always dangerous to speak of the majority when one does not have the means to really know how the majority feels.

But in all honesty I think many shareholders feel like me: Betrayed and disillusioned and wanting Tenner gone. However whilst many (the majority?) want Tenner gone they might for the moment not vote against him - this for two reasons:

1) Some might think “Let’s give Tenner a last chance and see how he fares on the long heralded commercialisation”

2) Some might think that whilst Tenner has underwhelmed at least he is someone who knows Nanoco really well

3) Some might have been wary of TH motivation and his selected team

I honestly think that 1), 2) and 3) explains to a good degree why Tenner is still in the office - but this should not be confounded/taken as a resounding vote of confidence.

Sometimes people prefer the devil they know to the one they don’t know.

However one thing is certain: After all the stretching of expectations on commercialisation there will come a time (and I think this is measured in months and not years) where in the absence of firm news on commercialisation as evidenced by a clearly written RNS shareholders will vote to oust Tenner & Co.

Haha Intrusivethought: This was a really good one. Validation of technology for peanuts and thanks to the settlement the quantum dot market will be Samsung’s.

@NGR: I think you are underestimating the discontent amongst Nanoco shareholders and their patience. After the unmitigated Samsung settlement debacle faith and patience in Tenner is in short supply.

@Trickymatters: Again for the benefit of those hard of understanding: Tenner and Board “won” but if you and others believe that the people voting for them are wholeheartedly behind Tenner & CO you are only kidding yourself.

Many shareholders- disappointed and bitter they are - have decided to give Tenner one last chance.

If he does not deliver within the next 5-6 months shareholders will oust him. Another baseless vague remark about “inflection point” and “commercialisation is getting closer” will just not cut it any longer (except for the super gullible like you).

@troublesome: I think that a very significant number of shareholders are disenchanted and disaffected with Nanoco management.

They feel let down and betrayed not only by the settlement but also the subsequent communication or maybe the word lack of communication is more appropriate here.

However I feel that also quite a lot we’re not convinced by Hammoudi’s team so in the end through gritted teeth voted for the devil they know.

However, Tenner and the Board should be aware that they are living on borrowed time - if they don’t deliver with concrete news of commercialisation within the next 5-6 months investors will try to get them out.

For the record: I voted to get Tenner out - but also not for Hammoudi’s replacement team. Tenner is in the last chance saloon. Someone with integrity would have voluntarily stood down as CEO but it seems that in our day and age CEOs need to be pushed out.

@troublesome: I took some losses when selling a good portion after the utter defeat, the unthinkable and unmitigate debacle of the Samsung settlement where Brian Tenner effectively sold out a good chunk of our business for a song.

I am still holding but with a lot of scepticism and little faith in a CEO who has misled investors over months and in the end didn't keep his word he gave to investors.

A piece of advice to potential investors here: Don't touch Nanoco with a bargepole. Only invest in a company where there are no question marks with regard to the integrity of the CEO and board.

Some posters here exhibit more hope than reason.

If we had such an excellent entry point why is LOAM not getting in again? After all they must be VERY familiar with the stock wink wink.

Oh and forget all this fluff about going after infringers- that was just one of these empty boasts of the fairytale teller par excellence Brian Tenner.

If Disney ever wants to do a new Pinocchio movie I would highly recommend Tenner.

@Nanogeddon: For what it is worth - I do agree 100% on all your points.

Like you the thing that most adequately reflects what the broader market (outside of this share forum) about Nanoco is the share price and it should give people food for thought that despite the very positive soundbites that Brian Tenner and Richards are putting out there no one seems to be buying - not even LOAM.

So the jury is out there (and I agree with NGR) and we might be pleasantly surprised but a lot of trust from private investors has gone down the drain after the Samsung debacle and the lack of explanation and transparency around it - and let us disregard the (desperate) attempt at positive spin from the CEO and the Board - clued up person can see right through it.

@qdnano: You truly are a joke. On 6th January we only had the first RNS out, ie the one where Nanoco said that a settlement had been achieved but that the practical details need to be worked out.

Now based on all the hot air and in the end not honoured promises by Brian Tenner we were led to believe that he would only agree to a multiples of the current value (this was said at a time when the share price was much higher than it is now).

I and other believed in Brian Tenner - does believing in the words of a CEO make you a bad investor???

Oh and one thing: I reiterate: I have been inesting for 6 years and am happy to admit to mistakes - no problem with that. However to find out that a CEO has wilfully and intentionally misled and betrayed investors was a first. Thank you Brian Tenner for this - I and others will not forget and will not forgive.

@qdnano: We are dealing with a board that seems a) either rather full of itself or b) that had decided we try to brazen it out and try the best we can ignore those pesky retail investors - after all these muggs are only here to pay our salaries and to be fleeced.

Sorry this board of directors and the CEO just don't have my trust any longer - and neither that of others.

Oh an what kind of exciting inflection point is there when the share price is well below the share placing of 37p and before the "great" Samsung settlement.

The RNS is a joke.

Richards has some real cheek to say that the requisitionists damaged Nanoco's value. What damaged Nanoco's value was the laughable amount of the settlement sum - THAT led to the value destruction in the first place - especially after Brian Tenner through his rhetoric had fanned investor expectations.

This board of directors is not to be trusted - regardless how the vote ended.

@NGR: I respect your stance even though I don't share it. I have been investing for over 6 years now and have never seen such a gap between rhetoric/statements/assurances from a CEO and what happened in the end.

Investing comes with risk and I can accept it but I expect that a CEO is thoughtful and honest in his communication - if not he/she will lose the trust of his/her investors...and sometimes that for good.

I have sold a good portion of my shares at a loss but continue to hold some shares. Losses (especially paper losses) I can bear but communication needs to be of a high standard and from BT as a trained lawyer I had expected a lot more.

I am now sceptical about Nanoco - not because of it sscience or products (I mean Samsung obviouslyrate us highly...shall I say more...) - but because I am extremely wary of its CEO and board and just don't know whether one can still believe them...and trust (not betting for unrealisitic outcomes) is essential when investing.

@NGR: "So Brian Tenner did nothing wrong..." - are you serious?

One needs to be wilfully blind or have an extremely bad memory to forget that Brian Tenner stated that he will never agree to a settlement that does not compensate Nanoco for past and future lost sales. He also said in a video presentation (I would urge you to watch it again!) that this would lead to a multiples in value.

When he said this (ie at the time of the video presentation) the share price was much higher.

So please tell me again that Brian Tenner's communication was not wrong, that it was not misleading and that in the end he didn't betray the trust that investors had in his words.

I am genuinely baffled that there are still some people who seem to give some credence to Brian Tenner.

Wake up fellow retail investors. Brian Tenner is a CEO who has systematically and wilfully deceived private investors. He has zero credibility left after it turned out that all his words and assurances are hot air with no substance.

This man and board should be subject of an FCA investigation and maybe should take place in one of the facilities of His Majesty the King. This is where he belongs.