Member Info for Kooba

This you Carlos on 11th feb?

“Brian Tenner is not above criticism at all and people have the right to question his work, But what people on this discussion do not have the right to do is neither tell other investors how they should feel about anything or speak on behalf of them as a way of peddling their own agendas.”

Consistent?

I also question the thought that a company having spent years if not decades in r&d in producing state of the art consumers electronics products feels that limiting the margin on selling their wares is that great an idea…think Apple are rather canny at marketing and pitching price points to maximise their profits.

If Apple took little margin , then so would STM , then so would Nanoco ( if they are indeed in anyway involved) i guess.

Whilst Apple has a superior product that is selling I’m sure they are happy to cream it ..having the next gen version as always is a way of widening the market further down the line.

For now though rather more important on here to know if our materials are featuring in anything before anything else.

Just saying things are basic without any supporting evidence doesn’t make it fact .

LOAM having a favourable position over other shareholders clearly demonstrated as they got to put one of their guys on the board of the company though they had no relevant commercial or litigation experience . LOAM and RG orchestrated the reverse takeover as were substantial shareholders in the business in its private form , they were considered a concert party at that point in time. LOAM has been a shareholder ever since..so you would have to know their cost at listing to make guarantees and claims of basic maths…you do not have that information .

So no idea then Daz..thanks.

..i guarantee you their holding is not this low.

So i don’t know what their in cost is as they were a major shareholder before the company was even listed so likely originally in at start up phase. Perhaps you could let us know what their cost is as you seem to know. Thanks,

Https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/02/14/2829068/32656/en/Quantum-Dot-Sensor-Market-to-Rise-at-a-20-9-CAGR-from-2023-to-2031-Reaching-a-Value-of-USD-972-3-million-Insights-from-Transparency-Market-Research-Inc.html

Yes they may indeed….but its a potential lead for gen 1 materials we didn’t know about before.

I had no expectation that gen 1 materials would be used in mass mobile devices after

listening to the presentations and reading the reports and RNS's…so i am pleased that this report today says that what must be the gen 1 materials if they are in the CMOS sensor in question could be available to be incorporated in mobiles on a 6 nine 9 month view. Just saying that is my opinion.

Nanoco presentation Oct

Forecast mobiles adopt SWIR in 2026

Nanonano..the current r&d projects are seen to have 2 year timeframes. Previous discussion has indicated that there may be limited opportunities for gen 1 materials and that was reinforced by Nanoco talking 2026 for mass mobile adoption ( if it were to happen) this article indicates that sensors using gen 1 type materials could be marketed…that to me seems earlier potential mass market traction than expected.

What’s to worry about BTs at the controls ..there’s probably a buy now pay later scheme!

The second link was to “join the dots”it is not that current but links the CMOS infra red sensor to QD film. So was out before an end product was on the market.

Seems good that mass market products could be available incorporating STM sensors on a shorter timeline than current guidance.

Official release

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/02/21/2832597/0/en/trinamiX-Visionox-and-STMicroelectronics-present-cost-efficient-secure-Face-Authentication-system-for-behind-OLED-integration-in-smartphones.html

Had just spotted that and you beat me to it!

“STMicroelectronics, a global semiconductor leader serving customers across the spectrum of electronics applications, adds its exceptional global-shutter CMOS sensor with improved near-infrared (NIR) sensitivity. The advanced combination of the ultra-compact hardware, the sophisticated algorithms from trinamiX, and the semi-transparent OLED display is available to OEMs for integration into new smartphone series within six to nine months.”

On top of this,,

“STMicroelectronics' technology is based on lead sulphide quantum dot thin films. These are made in solution and the deposition steps integrated within a CMOS semiconductor process, in STMicroelectronics' case within its 300mm fab.”

https://www.imveurope.com/news/sts-quantum-dot-sensor-set-volume-swir-imaging

= potential mass market.

That was then when hopes of a bonanza win were about , now they know that did not materialise…hence the share price now. The value attributed to shares in the past makes not difference to how they are priced now. Things change..valuations change. I’m not saying anyone would take 12p after the 12p payout in anyway..so cut the sherry nonsense, but was suggesting that a buyout was not out of the question.

food for thought..here you could tender or face a delisting ..not pleasant for private shareholders .

https://*********************/newsfeed/article/sourcebio-intl-plc-proposed-cancellation-and-tender-offer-1593544

these things can happen..often when a company does have funding an no need to seek additional funds from shareholders..where the shares trade now likely at a discount to realisable assets is obviously of no use for capital raising either.

“independent shareholders holding more than 50 per cent. of the company's ordinary shares capable of being voted on a resolution to approve a waiver resolution, being lombard odier and richard griffiths and his controlled undertakings…”

obviously just spitballing but the devil finds work for idle hands to do.

be good to have more to discuss properly.

Sorry answer to direct question..what justification , well because te management and their backers could make much more money, its the normal reason companies buy themselves out. It is up to shareholders if they accept the offer , but they could have 25% already on board ..LOAM don’t mind privatisations if the shares don’t reflect value i am told,

Could see a private equity funded management buyout quite easily ..the management think the company is illogically valued and takes no account of their commercial prospects and IP. The management has also had issues that presumably take management time around its listing.

They seem to have a lot of confidence in their organic prospects but that confidence is not reflected in the valuation…they do of course have a much better idea of the industry they operate in and their technology within that industry than any other shareholder ..or certainly one would hope they do.

Why not take advantage of the valuation discrepancy they see and offer to buyout other shareholders? Could they get funding from someone like…LOAM or RG ..they could then bring it back to NASDAQ in a few years time if all goes well and go again!

Pay 12p out market cap likely a small premium to cash of £20m or 6p a share with current shares in issue , .would a £40m or 12p offer get support ??

Thanks for comments..basically if it is not a commodity material then the performance will dictate the pricing..since we only know of STM using these materials though i imagine there is some agreed basis in the r&d agreement for commercial pricing anyway. There was a minimum commercial order attached to the original agreement that was a never divulged..so pretty sure there was something in place either relative to cost to give margin or relative to price of sensor incorporating. As always there is so little to go on.

Maybe the tardiness in paying out is down to them looking at taking it private ..might do better as a funded private entity…they would have to pay a decent premium to cash though nearer to twice that amount to have any chance of success though imho.

I think Nanonano referenced that the amount of material in a SWIR sensor could be similar to that needed for an average QLED screen due to thickness of application ..but that is from memory so might be wrong perhaps Nanonano could reflect back?

So just because the sensor is very small might not mean the dots required is that small relative to other devices to achieve the IR result?

Whether that helps extrapolate what the demand might be in terms of weight or cost is another matter!