Member Info for Kooba

Ngr

Not aimed at you Kooba but you’re hardly a party starter yourself 😉

I party when there is genuinely something to celebrate..

Smoke , mirrors ,noise and new black shirts don’t make a party !

404x..really liked your post and completely understand what you are getting at and are fully entitled to having an opinion ..it’s your opinion and you don’t have to justify jack.

I am still reeling from his discount retailer type shirt on Sky..is this the look of a go getting global leading technology company executive..nope.

Ngr

“13,945

You’re not worth any effort. I’ll not filter you but there is no point engaging with anyone who brings nothing to the party.”

If this is aimed at troublesome..engaging with them in an unproductive way is mostly what you do ..you can’t help responding with some vitriol ..why not block what are you scared of if you get nothing from their posts?? Confusing.

Ngr

“Except that’s where you are patently wrong- did you miss the vote outcome ?

It’s just that energy sucking people like you are more likely to moan…..which you do every single day multiple times…..you remind me of Marvin the Paranoid Android although he was funny so maybe that’s being unkind to poor Marv”

Is this aimed at me ..I have no idea what you are referring to perhaps manage your comms better and put things into some context with references and some idea who you are addressing ..simple stuff so others have a clue what you are on about. Cheers

What vote outcome are you referring to

Tbow..I am very familiar with listed U.K. tech and agree under funding is an issue I am also very aware that companies with excess cash find ways of spending it in unproductive ways and it means they are under no pressure to hit targets as they don’t have to come and justify the next round which is also to the detriment of shareholders. Nanoco say they will be cashflow breakeven in the next financial year yet are keeping 4-5years cash burn back on the basis of the current extremely modest genuine revenue £2.5m …why?

If you think there is something that means the buyback cannot start on the 10th April please let me know ..I wouldn’t bother though I do my dd…and have double checked. Advise do the same if you feel it appropriate to catch folk out!

The consultation should have been entirely around how they deliver on the commitment made ..not on whether to deliver on it. The decision to make a distribution was made by the board where there appears no wider consultation took place.anyway I see it as trying to once again deflect criticism of actions.

If they had said look we’ve good some fantastic corporate opportunities where we can get huge incremental value to our existing tech then great.

Unfortunately they have bought a bit of second hand kit..say they do not need to spend on production it is all there ready in spades and say they are going to be cashflow breakeven within 20 months. Why do they need more money held back that they committed too?

And why would anyone think a small tech company should have more money than necessary ??

They are already staffing it up the wall on BT PR profile pieces and new shirts ffs.

As well as once again building up a significant fixed cost base on what appears a very small first order…they better have read the teas leaves right, because that’s all they tell shareholders they have!

Ngr it’s totally irrelevant if one shareholder said you should keep all the cash..there was a firm commitment made by the board and if a smaller holder made such a comment and I stress if then it is of zero interest and does not reflect the very large majority. Never ever accuse BT of being transparent..that was just ruse to say to those unhappy at the method and quantum they are lucky to get what they did..which is very poor communication.

It was more that comment about some wanted ‘us’ to keep all the cash ..he said over 90% of those they consulted wanted the tender and they only consulted 37.5% of shareholders so that tells you that all but 3.75% might have wanted no return at the very best ..and some of those might have favoured a dividend..either way appears a very very small amount and certainly not a large institution ( there is only one anyway) that wanted no distribution. It has no bearing and should not have been put to shareholders as if they are lucky getting what the are getting…there was a firm commitment made to all shareholders and it has been met to its minimum extent.

Think you need to be a bit wary of BTs some wanted “us” to keep all the money ..he only spoke to 37-8% of shareholders and he said 90% favoured a tender. We then get the GM vote which again he points out that over 90% were in favour ( and I guess some vote against was by those wanting a divi not them keeping all the cash” so if anyone wanted them to keep all the money it can only have been less than 4% of outstanding shares…so why even mention it?

Think you dates are correct ..they start trading ex the entitlement to participate in the tender on the 10th..those who only tender up to their 38.5% will know what they will have sold those tendering more will have to weight. So there should be an adjustment on 10th..it’s unclear if all shareholders will be in a position to sell any rump if they chose to on that date though. But imagine any short term money arbing the tender will look to sell down a balance but may not be able to initially so the price could hold better than some expectations until all shareholders are free to deal…which depends on their administrator.

Technically the company can commence the on market buyback from the 10th April but I’m not sure there is a confirmed start date yet.

They obviously hope the slightly convoluted approach boosts the underlying value of the company .las BT said a dividend would almost reduce the price on a penny for penny basis..the full post tender impact may take a week or so to show itself.

“Underlying revenue (excluding Samsung licence revenue) of £1.0m, (H1 FY23: £1.6m). Decrease reflects timing of STMicroelectronics agreement being signed towards the end of the Period.”

So that included some stm r&d revenues and the continuation of Asian customer revenues.

Nanoco are still factoring in £6m Samsung and £2.5m for STM and Asian customer r&d work for the full year..Edison est £8.6m Cavendish est £8.4m….so where does any first order or any other orders before FY July 2024 fit in??

Ngr..we’ve just had the interims that include “the” order ..you can pick the bones out but revenue ex Samsung is down ..partly due to delay in securing StM extension. But if there was anything over a couple of hundred grand it would show take another look…maybe I’m wrong but you can’t hide a bigger order in the numbers given as far as I can tell.

Ngr that seems about right..although there maybe multiple sensors in certain devices that is not a small number per annum of sensors. ..so citing further small cases usage doesn’t necessarily make that breakeven figure an easily reachable target. But what’s a few years slippage amongst friends!! Joke ..hope they get there just can’t see how ..yet.

And that’s without any additional revenues !

The fact that they have kept more money back than they targeted with £23m net after clearing debt and paying £33m out maybe they are not so confident of securing that guidance themselves and have provided for more time knowing they can’t go back to shareholders if they miss. I would probably do the same but they theoretically have about 4 years burn now on current cost base..seems a lot!

As mentioned since we know the only customer is STM why would there be confidentiality over the size of the order ..I can think of no reason from StM pov…but if the order was ( and believe ) sub $250k it might have somewhat spoilt the “commercial inflection” point. So I think that information is being kept back by Nanoco arguably because it is not material relative to the overall revenues with the Samsung lump in there. But since they made such a fuss about it they should have opened the scale of it for shareholders not tried to hide it away. It’s virtually impossible currently to see how they move to cash flow breakeven next year.

They had already alerted shareholders that he will be replaced as he joined board in Nov 2015 directors are not considered to be independent after 9 years ( too long imho) and had served as chair for most of that. When he joined the shares were over 50p. Much has been seen over his tenure ..but not much positive for shareholders over his term. They stressed today needing a Chair with U.K. listed experience..not sure to 2 new Neds fit that bill and other Neds are appropriate ..so I would now expect an outside appointment.

If the company are flashing the cash on PR I think the money would be far better spent finding and experienced commercial / sales director as there is little executive experience building a pre revenue business as far as I can see.

There was a question ( from Nanonano??) about Samsung partnering with an image sensor company ..that they said STM already has an agreement with. So it seems the big boys spread amongst different partners ..which I think is natural. Do we know if STM or the other ASian companies also spread their development risk with other QD companies? Everything is so clothed in secrecy it’s difficult to know if we are the only horse they are backing ..if you are going to build a $500m oil rig do only get one firm to draw up plans and quotes??

The soap one is basically saying forget about the end use surely we sell the oil to STM then they do with as they please..seems very STM reliant so trust they are aligned. Good news is hopefully there will be more than one customer in due course but for second gen and some way off.

Short term it’s all down to STM to make a market it seems and from the sounds of it generated GEN 1 sales of £8m per annum to give an annualised cash flow breakeven at some point in 2025.

Difficulty with that is that BT said it’s unlikely there are ongoing supply arrangements more of a contracts when needed basis..this could leave very unbalanced revenues to work with or manufacture for I guess.

Thanks Nanonano have now watched the Q&As..nothing much new.

Though a few more insights that there is no visibility on future orders but they are confident…talking of there being no ongoing firm orders but normally there are indications that feed into their confidence. ..but the fact is we have had not further orders in over 4 months.

I should have asked why since , as they stress the customer is STM whoever is the end user why since we know the identity of the customer why we can’t have a confirmation of the $ amount of that first order.

Other inconsistency is they said both new NEDs are now serving on the board which is not quite right is it?

“Dr Jalal Bagherli will join the board on 5 April 2024.”

Would expect confirmation to the market properly when Dr Bagherli takes up his seat.

Yes splitting hairs but they need to get the small stuff right to get confidence they are on top of the big stuff.

Not wanting to comment on individual competitors but BT gave QS a good shoeing !!

No real hope of any licence or otherwise revenues in display as far as I could tell ..something that was far more up front post settlement.

Do we think the two development customers with over 200,000 customers each and the two big players in consumer sensors markets are STM and Sony is telling us the other R&D agreement or is that a leap?

Any thoughts thoughts from others?

I’m out of the country and won’t be able to listen to the IMC presentation. Not expecting anything from the presentation as will be the same as analyst one but if anything interesting comes up on the Q&As would be grateful for any feedback. Hoping can access the whole thing when back next week.

Off to the slopes..Happy Easter ..play nice!