The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
@Valueformoney: I am not saying influencing by putting out a certain recommendation but by being honest and transparent when talking to the analysts of Edison. I mean when Brian Tenner as a low base would have been happy to accept USD 50 million how can that be reconciled with the USD 200-250 million that Edison put out for lost US sales revenues and Edison pointing out that this is only one third of global revenues.
I am sure that the Edison analysts would have asked for the economic damage that Nanoco thinks it suffered and what a ballpark figure would be.
Sorry but I just don’t believe that between the Edison output in terms of factual content and figures and Nanoco that there is not a link.
Again I hope that Pallas and Hammodi bring this to court as this is really the only venue where one can hope for a proper resolution for all the troubling aspects of the year to date developments.
@NGR: I and many others would argue that it is by LETTING Brian Tenner remain in charge is what will threaten Nanoco.
I mean who is going to invest in a company where by a little of research they can find out that the CEO has misled investors? Who????
Brian Tenner has lost all credibility because he has shown no integrity.
@valueformoney: Believe it or not there are people who bought not just based on the Edison report but also based on what Brian Tenner was telling investors in presentations in 2021/2022.
Also just to remind you: Edison was paid for their research by Nanoco so whilst the report might be formally independent the input and information must surely also have come from conversations with Nanoco management? And here just my simple question: Why did Tenner never try to put balance on the USD 200-250 million that Edison wrote was lost by Nanoco just due to lost US revenues alone?
Surely Tenner knew very well what kind of impression and calculations that would lead to by investors…?
My impression remains very much that he has consciously misled investors over months and had enough time if he had wanted to to put a more realistic picture out there - which he so blatantly failed to do!
@NGR: There is the possibility of severe wrongdoing by management in the room. Wouldn’t you want this to be cleared up or do you want your money invested in a company led by a man whom some people think might be guilty of serious lapses in integrity and even criminal behaviour?
No the deal with Samsung is done and what a capitulation that has been - but I and others will not go away.
But good effort by you anyway - If Brian asks you whether you have defended him well you can certainly point to many posts today where your mantra seems to be “nothing to see here nothing to see…”
@GuardianAngel: BT looked and sounded super super confident “and off to trial it is”. I mean when does acting stop and acting becomes lying?
I mean the way it is portrayed now is that our resounding win at PTAB, the years of collaboration with Samsung, the email of Samsung reaching out to Nanoco didn’t exist at all - to be honest Brian Tenner bottled it badly and the question is now whether there has also been criminal dealings in play or not - again I am not in a position to say but this is really something that needs to be discussed in great detail in a court of law. Certainly the Pallas letter has set out enough points that need to be scrupulously addressed and answered.
Hm funny that the brigade “let’s look to the future and draw a big big veil on the past” is out there.
As to the argument that BT knows Nanoco I can tell you that every CEO is replaceable especially one that has misled a very large chunk of his investor base and basically has lost their trust and support.
It is almost like saying I don’t want a bully replaced in school as I know that this bully will only beat me up but not use a knife. If this bully gets expelled from school the next bully might even use a knife…
Not a great comparison but I trust people get what I am driving at.
So the legal small print in documents not easily/readily available to investors. Great investor communication…..
Again I ask how Brian Tenner could speak with a clear conscience about multiples of share price…
Anyway let’s vote him out so he cannot mislead private investors any longer.
@Ecclescake: I very much doubt that Pallas / Hammodi would issue such a letter without substance behind it as doing so without some evidence to back their claims would make themselves vulnerable to litigation.
I hope for a court case as this is where this should be discussed in details and statements be made under oath and with proper sanctions a possibility.
@troublesome: Correct and this is also for me the worst part - it was clear that Brian Tenner was aware of some of the conversations here in 2022 and in one presentation he addressed some of the points - in a mock sincere manner…I say mick sincere as he conveniently left out to note that his base line /low expectations were light years lower than what was mentioned on this board - mentioned based on research by Edison which was paid by Nanoco and also on very confident soundings off by Brian Tenner.
To do a fund raise at 37p when you know that you are willing to accept USD 50m as settlement just beggars belief.
@NGR: You are correct on this one. I don’t blame Brian Tenner on this - at least on this point on commercialisation he did use these qualifiers.
Nevertheless he is still soundly culpable on hyping and inflating expectations on the settlement despite already being prepared to accept a small settlement.
So in the end he was still insincere.
Thank you Feeks and Nanogeddon.
I can only think of one reason why NGR is doing all he-she can do to try to sweep the absolutely shameful and reprehensible behaviour of Mr Tenner under the table.
I do wish that there will be a proper legal and in addition FCA investigation into Nanoco/LOAM and the way investors were communicated to.
This case in my humble opinion stinks and stinks to the heavens.
@NGR: Funny so you cite the second RNS as defence….absolutely hilarious.
So utterly utterly ridiculous.
Never mind lawyers are now on the case and I guess Brian Tenner is soon toast as CEO and rightly so.
Whether criminal charges need to be laid at various individuals I leave that to lawyers.
@Inteusive: Do yourself a favour and vote this management and board out.
&NGR: What messaging are you talking about??? Until the second RNS there was no messaging at all that could have meant that USD 50m is our minimum base.
Please point me to that messaging!
@NGR: A good joke… So LOAM sold…. Surprise surprise…. Wink wink is all I can say.
Very convenient to have a long term view… I guess that would suit Brian Tenner….investors being misled and following behind the carrots that always seem to be sooooo close …oh yeah we know the spiel by now.
I will be voting Tenner out.
@NGR: You are really trying to Kidd us are you…. Brian Tenner spoke about major inflection point in value and so this is how everyone understood it.
I guess you are being paid a princely amount of money to defend him…
@Tornadotony: Thank you and your listing of past RNS wording from Brian Tenner with the share price at the time says everything.
Even wilfully blind people like NGR or Torpedo cannot have an answer to this.
@NGR: I see you wilfully continue to ignore that Brian Tenner has blatantly misled investors over months. Look at the share price of what Brian Tenner tried to sell as a transformational settlement- I mean would you expect a transformational settlement to lead to a collapse in the share price? Do you really try to tell us that this is what Brian Tenner wanted us to expect when talking about the Samsung litigation as a “major inflection point” in shareholder value?????
You are kidding me…. I suggest that you NGR sorry Brian prepare better excuses.
NGR is definitely very close to the board. Never mind bring on Hammodi/Pallas and let us jointly clean out Nanoco. Private investors have been misled for long enough and time for Tenner to go into early retirement where he cannot mislead and betray investors any longer.
Yes you are and please just because one Brian Tenner throws in some words of general caution to investors in an investor presentation does not mean he would have given ground to Samsung. Again if as the second RNS had claimed that Nanoco had given lower guidance before (where, when???) than this would not have been a problem anyway correct?