GreenRoc Accelerates their World Class Project to Production as Early as 2028. Watch the full video here.
Possible that there is some buyback activity today just below 17p level see if it develops and there is a print out later. But theres a chance looking at some of the activity. Maybe they are in again at current levels..i certainly can’t get an explanation for events out of the company.
Referring to “they have stopped the buyback less than halfway through “
Well it’s either the company because they gave specific instructions to Cavendish different to fulfilling the £3m buy back they told shareholders would be continued to exhausting the £3m or the AGM. …Or it is Cavendish who have decided for whatever reason having been very keen ob buying up stock well over 20p that the shares now no longer offer value to Nanoco shareholders ..so you can take they as the company and their agent if you like,,not sure its that complicated is it??
Silly thing to say the price has just adjusted for the reduction in cash held to be a like for like valuation..exactly as forecast. Nothing to do with criticising anything ..but the lack of progress in the commercial revenues..7 months now since first commercial order and the fact that they have stopped the buyback less than halfway through i would guess are slightly more important factors than anything posted on any BB. I have replaced all the shares sold at 24p now and may by more with the excess cash left..the shares here do not discount the possibility of the company actually delivering what they guide to imo ..so the risk reward is pretty good. But you have the management to thank for the shareprice..no one else.
I would imagine that board minutes and litigation committee minutes would provide evidence of what was discussed and known by members ..LOAM having a representative on both up to Sept 2022. I presume such documents could be asked to be presented at court. As to any conversion around the 6th January again there should be a record kept of conversations with those on the midnight call, was there any advisors on that call ? There should be a list of those on the call who could also be called to testify on the disclosures made…if it was a call just with 2 shareholders at midnight that did not disclose anything material in terms of the litigation settlement why was the call necessary ? BT narrative was that the call took place to try to get those involved in the litigation to take lower settlement figures, this included the Bondholders ( who were also shareholders) …can’t think how that conversation takes place without a disclosure that the settlement is low ball relative to earlier expectation. Either way the bondholders did not take a haircut and were paid in full including a very large success bonus.
Any thoughts that this is a good outcome for LOAM or Nanoco is misguided. They wanted the whole thing thrown out but it is deemed there is a case to answer so i very much doubt they are celebrating having to go through a full trial with repercussions that are not just civil.
If such evidence that they had inside information in January 2023 and were very active in the market based on that information is admitted in court evidencing earlier such behaviour …then there is a big problem …it was not an isolated large sale as the damages claim is based upon..but would then demonstrate that many transactions with multiple parties where made when there was not a level playing field. A much bigger potential damages case.
Why is that ??
Focus on..
“However, events in January 2023 as alleged by the Claimant are striking. If his account is proved correct, it may be that Mr Giles was indeed encouraging him to trade in the Third Party's shares with knowledge of matters that amount to inside information. It is of course the Claimant's case that Mr Giles was one of the people with whom he was dealing at the Defendant and was part of the Volantis team”
This is concerning..although the case revolves around a transaction between Hamoodi and LOAM in 2022…the conduct around Jan 2023 is raised.
“For reasons that I have identified above, the Claimant is able to show some evidence to support the argument that Mr Giles shared inside information with him in January 2023. The exploration of that issue is necessary in order to reach an informed judgement on the issue of the earlier allegation of the failure to disclose inside information.”
That could be a can of worms!
It seems Hamoodi brought 4 different claims against Lombard Odier; fraud, misrepresentation, unlawful means conspiracy to defraud, and negligence. All have the same cause of action and that is insider dealing.
LOAM sought to have the case thrown out but the judge has ordered trial for claims of fraud and misrepresentation, also allowing Hamoodi to amend his claims of unlawful means conspiracy and negligence later on... In short, LOAM have lost their arguments in having the case dismissed it seems.
Found it
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2024/1314.html
“..will pursue an ongoing on-market share buyback programme of up to a total value of £3.0 million to provide a continuing value-accretive return of capital to Shareholders.”
continuing
adjective
UK /kənˈtɪn.juː.ɪŋ/ US /kənˈtɪn.juː.ɪŋ/
Add to word list
happening or existing without stopping:
The fact that the instruction to execute the buyback was given to Cavendisk to act independently to fulfil the commitment that “ will end on the earlier of the date the aggregate consideration paid for Ordinary Shares under the share buyback programme reaches £3.0 million” or the agm in December ..begs further questions as to why it has stopped all activity for almost a month. This is not was was agreed or communicated.
On the basis it is now almost a month since the company inexplicably decided to halt the buyback they committed to as part of the capital return ..that was at the bottom end of what was promised. I just wondered what interpretation others made of there communication on the buyback? Does it indicate that they would just stop for long periods of time before getting half way through? If the price had run away i could understand maybe pausing but it is trading well down on what has already been paid ( value accretively!) ..the idea is that it is in shareholder interests to pursue the buyback..so why has it been stopped?
“…the Company will pursue an ongoing on-market share buyback programme of up to a total value of £3.0 million to provide a continuing value-accretive return of capital to Shareholders. The Share Buyback Programme commences today and will end on the earlier of the date the aggregate consideration paid for Ordinary Shares under the share buyback programme reaches £3.0 million and the date of the Company's next annual general meeting in 2024.”
“Without any prospect of orders ..”
It might be quiet and you might not believe everything the management forecast but i think there is a good prospect of orders and two clear customers they are working with , STMicro and i suspect Sony..who will be the biggest players in SWIR sensors i believe. So although it’s quiet and the timelines might stretch and they might miss their cash break even I think they will get further commercial orders in the near term.
The same fascination that led to many saying the shares would not fall post tender as ther would be no sellers and the buy back would only push the shares higher. Now over 25% down from those heady days only 6 weeks ago and being a shareholder i find it interesting what is driving the valuation of the company. The main factor appears to be the pulling of the share buyback as there is nothing but silence coming directly from the company to give any other influence.
The company decided to pay the minimum pledged as a capital return and keep more cash back than they said they would. They also committed to an ongoing capital return in the form of an on market buyback using £3m than would be value accretive ..on a continuing basis. It has stopped for no obvious reason..even though it is key to strategy and they say is in shareholder interests. You don’t want to know why? Sure it doesn't have an impact on the company delivering on its business strategy but not much to report there after the first commercial order now 7 months ago. Problem is there is not much to discuss apart from the shareprice itself just now …but i find the price action post tender fascinating indeed…and maybe some lessons were learnt by some?
As covered previously the volume was artificially boosted by 30% odd when the buyback was operating. Also when operating correctly working the bid in an order driven market you can advertise size and narrow the spread ( which has been wider than normal past two week) which encourages business. ..so is volume down because they are not operating and boosting liquidity or are they not operating because volume has eased back..maybe a bit of both. What they could do is effectively edge buy level up over a week or so to try to find a better two way market ..like this they will get nothing more done..maybe thats what they want?
Perhaps ,perhaps ,perhaps…lots of guessing and making stuff
But most of it is not how a broker managed buy back is done..they will just keep buying where they can to fulfil the instructions given which were related to shareholders that would be on a continuing basis until the money was spent or the AGM. Normally a managed buyback is agnostic to the price within the limits set out to shareholders and will participate in whatever is traded ..they were happy being a very large part of volume higher up ..but zero at lower levels.
Managed buybacks do not tend to just stop and start unless the shares breach the terms set out to holders..which they haven’t. Also as stated to shareholders there are no limits on the percentage of volume they can be ( most are limited to 20-30% of volume)
So the idea it is to let them find a level..bit late for that. Think they are going down ( algo or otherwise) not their job and a bit late.
Either the instruction was for only £1.3m and is done and yet to be refreshed..not what was informed to shareholders. Or indeed they can”t be bothered on lower volume or better volume days for now.
Either way the shareholders gave clear approval for a buy back and the company forecast a build in revenues and new customers..so they should get on with it if that is still the case as its in shareholder interests to do so apparently.
Truth is there is no obviously explanation for not executing the buy back for a single share in 15 trading days. If there is they should announce why they are not continuing as they said they would,.
All sounds FAB , but begs the question on the “Buy back in progress” part. It’s not progressing is it. For a large part of this month and with all your other positive points why not?
It is part of a committed return of capital and discribed as value accretive ..that means good for shareholders. Assuming Cavendish know the same as you only ..why have they stopped buying?
Knowing what you know and all those positives and having paid over 20p for the benefit of the company and only done 40% odd of the committed capital , would you just stop?