Member Info for Kooba

Well that’s nonsense ..who owns the company exactly.

Amazing that some are happy to condemn what with hindsight seems over enthusiasm over the settlement yet cheerlead a new wave of enthusiasm based on absolutely nothing new and very little evidence apart from what is spoon fed from the company and its marketing…don’t get me wrong I would love everything to fall into place and the shares have a significant rerate ..but blaming the shareholders for the 60% fall in the share price last year is a bit bloody rich.

The management has a duty to manage expectation..they did not.

So puff away but here’s a useful quote for investors

“Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.”

PVX “I think the management know perfectly well where the dots are going but they have a defence that they don't.”

Wow ..so according to you they are buying shares from their shareholders with knowledge of the underlying customer and therefore a far better idea of potential revenue growth that they are not sharing…information many are saying would be highly price sensitive and inside information especially if it is indeed Apple . But it’s ok because they have plausible deniability.

They are nuts if they think that’s a strategy.

The thing is chaps it gives folks the option of taking money out…you may not want to , others might but everyone would have the option .some might fancy their chances of selling at a tender price and being able to reinvest lower once the tender complete..as to there suddenly being an Apple announcement they are using Nanoco dots ..well thats a risk worth taking. It seems not even the board know where their materials are going since they are buying shares in the market..so they either don’t know or think it is not price sensitive.

They don't have much cash available they will have just over £60m net in February after getting the second payment of £58.8m so highly unlikely they are buying in the market giving holders no notice , if they were they have to disclose immediately ideally same day . Once they have the money an on market programme of being x % of volume and limited premiums to 5 day rolling..the normal on market approach would take forever and i just cant see that as being an effective approach to returning capital as they have pledged. If they set a tender at a minimum with a book build type of structure so folks can input acceptable levels ..why not? The company can then effect the buy back on the best terms.

Maybe it gives a choice of an out for those who want it and for those who see big value in the organic business a way of concentrating their interest by not participating. That seems a reasonable approach.

The official position

Return of Capital

As announced in February 2023 at the time of the litigation settlement, the Board stated that, when considering the allocation of the net proceeds its intention was to balance any investment needs of Nanoco's growing commercial business with delivery of a material return of capital to shareholders. Accordingly, the Board resolved to return between GBP33-40 million (or approximately 10-12 pence per share) to shareholders, using some of the second tranche of the proceeds of the litigation (net $71.75 million), which is expected to be received during February 2024.

In July 2023 a capital reduction was effected to create the sufficient distributable reserves to facilitate the return of capital. No decision has yet been taken as to the method of any such return of capital and further announcements will be made in due course.

They have stated that they seek tax efficiency in the distribution but i don’t think have committed in any way to offer a choice of income or capital…i can’t think how that could be done. I think they will take major shareholder considerations into account ..then do what LOAM want !!

I can’t see it being a special dividend as that is not tax efficient for many holders as subject to income tax..they may be able to do a actual capital distribution

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/capital-gains-manual/cg57800

I would still favour a share buyback via tender at a premium.

Hopefully not long for some clarity.

I have no worries on the monies owed are paid on time

- Litigation concluded with $150m cash settlement to be paid in two equal tranches (by 5 March 2023 and by 3 February 2024)

How and when the promised capital distribution takes place may take a little longer. As i have mentioned if the board have agreed a distribution method but it has not been announced to shareholders it strikes me that that information would be price sensitive..one must resume then that having had a year to consider their options they have not as yet decided how to proceed.

Yeah except that can happen after the director buying is announced , all the big volume was transacted long before the director share buying was actually disclosed to the market.

I agree , they do have authority to buy back 10% of the outstanding equity from last AGM but if they were to exercise that authority I think they would have to inform the market and set out the basis of execution. If they were to want to effect the capital distribution through market buyback or a tender then due to the scale relative to shares outstanding they would need to call a GM to seek authority to increase buyback provision…so likely there would be good notice of any such move.

On transactions today the director deals do not tie up with the large market transactions..some dates different and prices wrong. Just looks like an institutional seller of 8.75m at 20p and two buyers on the other side paying 20.1 p 5 mins later the mm taking a turn. Oryx recently edged below 3% disclosed I’m guessing was them selling large part of balance. We will find out if a disclosed holder has increased in the next few days ..if Loam move through a % barrier they would need to disclose…they have a few days grace to announce.

Odd that directors buying just ahead of largest volume day in 10 months ..always lots of coincidences here!!

Interesting heading as the two new appointments are to be non exec’s they will not be running the day to day but will undoubtedly be significant in strategic direction and holding the exec’s to account. They are also classed as independent something which the board has sorely lacked over the past few years. I would expect one of the new non executives to move to Chait shortly after they take their seat…Richards has blow been on the board for 9 years and chair for most of that..so time for a refresh in that role according to best corporate practise.

Well seems to confirm the first commercial order was STM and that STM are pleased with first gen materials and are committing ..including using their name to gen 2 material project…possibly a non toxic one ( though did see someone thinks they have that nailed already). Still no clue as to the STM underlying customer or product..we can but surmise ..definitely a positive but again they have factored this work in as it merely supports existing revenue projections

” The JDA helps to underpin the Board's expectations for non-license fee income in FY24, which are in line with FY23. ”

Interesting thought piece from the friends down the road. Makes one realise the full potential in SWIR ..lets hope we are backing the right horse.

https://www.vision-systems.com/cameras-accessories/non-visible/article/14303373/quantum-dot-technology-is-enabling-machine-vision-applications

Agree all that and the watch comment ..but once reverse engineered then difficult to keep components under wraps though it appears they are going to keep close control on distribution. Still if there are quantum dots ( and hopefully Nanocos) in the SWIR sensors we still cant tell the scale of the order received or the ongoing demand from the product. What we can get a better idea of is exact use in the devise and how it might be rolled out across mass consumer devices.

Guess we should hear the exact amount and means of the capital distribution in the next few weeks but not sure what other news we might get..though any hint at licence news around display however small would be welcome.

Agree on watches I have been keeping and eye on that space too , there have been some delays in the next generation watch too but lack of clarity in new functions as to whether any new SWIR sensors might be incorporated. Certainly a mass market product that they are seeking to find usp’s in quality of display and functionality but much seems to focus on incorporating medical diagnostic features.

It’s funny seeing folk write off a company that started in 2019 for its lack of commercial visibility whilst defending a business that was established 25 years ago which finally got a small commercial order last month ..views on understanding the business and the timeframes to market are somewhat selective.

I wonder if there are any confidentiality agreements in this business!?..the public disclosure standards required for listed companies are different to private ones , and we get no details from the listed ones!

Wish there was evidence of Nanoco hustling for business and bigging themselves up….when they weren’t raising money !

Must say the QS board has been strengthened from when i looked some time ago. They have quite an assembly of experience both academic and commercial.

https://quantumscis.com/about/

Unsubstantiated pathetic drivel and abuse…sums up your contribution nicely.

Me folk are scared of the competition!

Most ex Nanoco people there were let go because Nanoco failed to get any commercial traction several years ago with a notable party walking after previously allowing another partner gain access to the know how around CFQD’s for display. They were made redundant to cut costs…if you have anything else to say on it …say it don’t be a dick and make silly innuendos.

Since they think anyone selling the shares down here is illogical it might be good for long suffering shareholders to be better convinced why not park of the managements job is to promote the company in terms of the value as well as the products !