Member Info for Kooba

I’m pretty sure they have said something like but haven’t got time to look it up now…but i have argued before that Nanoco Customer is STMicro and that they are a global electronics company ( not sure consumer was mentioned!) so i don’t think the comment refers to the underlying customer..according to Nanoco they don’t know who it is anyway!

Or less !!

…cash balance £23m and with probably 183m shares in issuance by end of May this eludes to 14p..

I make £23m divided by 183m million shares 12.56pps..not going to make a huge difference as the shares will trade where they trade ..but the on market buyback purchase at a likely premium to the 13p cash level post tender ( if fully subscribed) means cash is further diluted on the remaining shares..fully diluted for the outstanding options a bit lower still.

Hopefully tomorrows results will be more enlightening on the real prospects which is probably more important that the ex entitlement adjustment mechanics.

Nb the current revenue forecasts for the current financial year to end July does not factor in additional revenues over the Samsung £6m accounting treatment and the £2.5m ongoing revenues from the r&d work programmes so where and when they expect the revenue to build is rather unclear. The forecast also takes no account of what the first commercial order actually was but since it was received delib=vered and invoiced first half we should be able to work it out tomorrow. The samsung and r&d is apportioned equally over the year so we should see £4.25m anything above should point to the order i guess.

Think one needs to treat such articles with a bit of caution.

“Even with the £33m return of capital, Nanoco could have around £34m of cash liquidity left on its balance sheet to fund its operations”

The company have stated they will have about £23m left on the balance sheet after the tender and £3m share buyback and of course repaying that outstanding £5m of debt. So mind your eye. Whether that £11m difference impacts their view of the shares who knows but it is significant difference and clearly wrong.

Well busy week for Nanoco

Interim Results 27th

General Meeting 28th

Not sure if there is any results presentation ..they probably get sick of shareholder asking reasonable questions.

To have a cgt bill you would need profits..I doubt many holders are carrying taxable profits ..though LOAM took some out Jan 2022..but some of Loams holding is for a public pension fund I gather so would have been tax free anyway.

The business was valued at £40m at listing ( when Loam were a significant holder) and has raised a chunk of change since then through dilutive equity issues ..there has been some significant falls over the years so possible some have modest gains but most are holding much higher.

Maybe its not a coincidence the % of holders that were consulted over the mechanism and the level?

Following the receipt of the Final Litigation Proceeds, the Board and its advisers consulted with shareholders representing approximately 37.5 per cent. of the Company's issued share capital on the different options for a proposed return of capital.

The ability to subscribe for additional shares above and beyond the 38.5% is the reason why this is likely filled.

Ngr

I see what you did there maybe a good idea to have some optionality depending on the likely adjustment post entitlement.

Be interesting if there is anything that meaningful with the interims next week that further changes folks view of the short term and long term expectation.

IDL70 think you have to believe that LOAM had a say in the mechanism and level..NB Turcan ,, “He has been advising and investing in UK smaller companies for over 20 years and has extensive experience in assisting public companies in creating value for all stakeholders.”

I think it has been shown they hold much influence over the board and as the largest holder i would imagine that the tender idea comes from their camp..i pointed out for a while that from past experience LOAM would favour a premium tender ..i think it is unlikely they will not participate..as to the amount they tender , that might be debatable..they could tender their whole holding. Certainly there will have been thought in where the tender is pitched perhaps at a level where many of the pi’s holding are not tempted,,meaning other large shareholders can get more away.Just possibilities!

Full news not out yet but i thought this could have been an area of interest for Nanoco products.

Troublesome anything I post is an opinion based on facts available ..nothing I post should ever be taken as advise and I try not to post as if it is. As mentioned before, individuals situations vary as do their risk profiles so people should make decisions based on their own circumstances.

I would say the circumstances are completely different to the settlement.

We know everything here it’s a corporate action there are facts…on litigation we knew nothing then there was just poor guidance and secrecy for most.

Thanks for trying to assure me of something ..you cannot know . Appreciated.

Without thinking about the situation post event how can you make a decision about what to do in a corporate action itself.

Concerning that one might not consider the consequences in a decision making process.

Maybe consider not taking advantage of a major liquidity event at 24p and the price does actually come back to 17p where you could replace stock 29% lower than you just sold some ..or just taking an exit for part of your holding at a level not seen for many months.not sure how folk would feel is they dismissed that opportunity without thought.

I wouldn’t be alarmed at other peoples opinions or actions ..not sure how it impacts others.

Ginodog things only get factored in once the ability to participate or receive benefits has gone.

Even though people know a share is going ex dividend it is not factored in until the shares trade ex the entitlement..i expect the same here.

The £3m on market buy back might help stabilise the price i guess but unclear when they might exercise that authority..knowing Nanoco it will not be quick ..unless LOAM realise that many small holders will not be able to sell for a significant period after 9th and want to get more away !!

Especially knowing that the shares in issue have just been reduced by nearly 40%!!

They are also well aware hopefully that the cash , the basis of recent valuation has dropped by over 50%.

Look i get your point and not saying it is wrong I’m just saying that the distribution is really just a balance sheet event and not a valuation event..if the shares get rerated as a result of paying over half the cash out stranger things have happened but the aftermarket will likely not be dictated by small long term holders but by how some of the larger shareholders and shorter term money behaves..as much as you saying you can’t see folks selling at 16p i find it difficult to think folks will be interested in buying at anywhere close to 20p once the the entitlement to tender expires. Lets see.

A share is worth what someone is prepared to sell and buy at finding a price equilibrium.

All i am pointing out is what theoretically might happen if the shares are valued on the same basis by those buyers and sellers as has been the case for the past 6 months or so and have shown my workings. If you think that is wrong then fine show how the company suddenly becomes worth more by paying out over half the cash it holds which has been that basis of valuation.The only argument must be one of sentiment and that the enterprise value jumps up from zero-£6m as has been the case over that six months to multiples of that amount on no new commercial progress..I’m not sure how that happens.

But we will only know after the 9th if there is an adjustment to around the 17p level. So i can’t explain the workings more than i have.

Is a share worth more with an option to sell a minimum 38.5% at a significant premium to the cash held of 18p or without that option and with cash of 13p?

LordWM..have posted similar calculations and I factor in the recent EV against the reduced shares in issue and come up with 16.25p on a like for like basis..so do not disagree on there being a post entitlement adjustment. How much that ends up being we will see.

Depends on whether some short term money has bought in to tender and jumps out of the balance held ..quite a few variables around investor behaviour ! But not many will want to sell pre tender I guess as don’t want to miss the opportunity..things might be different after 9th and whilst investors in noms may not be able to sell ..larger holders and ii can.

TG2D yes fully aware of that just saying that the 10% retained in treasury rank differently to ordinary shares and whilst still in issue are not outstanding.

Treasury shares remain issued but not outstanding as are owned by the company ..until they are either issued or cancelled. They do not rank alongside ordinary shares for voting rights or other entitlements and do not form part of the market capitalisation whilst in treasury.

So the shares outstanding post the tender will be about 200m ..which could reduce further if they effect the on market share buyback..unclear when that might start.