Member Info for Kooba

Or it is a full past and future no fault licence agreement similar to Samsung settling the litigation all on LG terms who insisted on a confidentiality agreement or that Nanoco themselves wanted such an agreement to keep under wraps what has been agreed in terms of an ongoing licence.

What is telling… is that the terms are confidential which is not ideal…but it also means there is no point making up what is not known to paint a bullish picture that may well not be there.

My thoughts are that it was very much dictated by LG..but is important in terms of Nanoco challenging use of company IP and important in slightly extending the cash runway.

Https://www.edisongroup.com/research/sensing-initiatives-progress-and-expand/BM-2455/

I would agree that the market is overlooking the build in revenues from the scale up work for this customer in 2027..but also am wary of how these JDAs have not moved to commercialisation previously.

With the settlement proceeds of about £3.4m net there is virtually no enterprise value that this or any other initiative being worked on is successful or that they will find a buyer for the operations. So risk reward is compelling..

Well not a huge amount but point proved and cash runway slightly extended (8 months) but these things can be a major expensive distraction and again it clears the decks in terms of a transaction for the company.

So whilst relatively modest a welcome outcome.

Ha ha ha …you again making school boy errors and being corrected…check your facts before posting and then maybe just maybe you would nt look such a twerp.

Exactly £6m just accounting for Samsung already received then £1.5m R&D services to 2 separate JDAs and £100k from innovate UK as a grant. Still left with a large cash burn covering very little of the £500k a month fixed cost base or any litigation costs. But the FD did stress that the burn was £350-400k a month net of the JDA income….not £500k a month burn as Terry says.

Terry= clueless= Terry +AI.

“Revenue Visibility for FY26: A £7.6m orderbook provides significant revenue coverage for the coming year's operational costs, drastically reducing near-term risk.”

Talk us through that £7.6m orderbook and how it provides significant revenue coverage for the coming years operational costs…fascinated

There may not be a clear focus on photovoltaic paint for cars ..but that might be relevant mid term but they were far more bullish on the pace that SWIR sensors could be adopted by automotive industry as part of move to autonomous systems.

The functionality of sensors for automotive would be different to current small device focus so there could be some serious JDA work around working in that field. But as with all the SWIR development work seems very slow to a validated commercial stage so whilst mobile device and automotive demand would be huge markets as the effectiveness and cost efficiency seems a no brainer but why is no serious money being thrown at accelerating development to steal a march on rivals…all seems peanuts and no hurry relative to the market opportunity we are told exists.

Once again giving the benefit of the doubt to them and picked a few up on yesterdays weakness much is based on trust in new CEO delivering on either an exit or in accelerating organic revenues early next year. The upside downside remains compelling but completely understand the rating due to previous dead ends ..Dimitry has everything to prove but he believes he can deliver value…lets see.

The key thing from the meeting today was not that they are still talking to potential buyers but that they are aiming for cash flow breakeven in 2027 this is a bit of a turn up. That would mean a big build up in revenues 2026/7 this was explained by the scale up work for Asian customer 1…that would mean a vast increase in product deliveries ahead of a possible device launch in 2028…we have heard these expectations before but i have more faith in the new CEO.

That forecast build in revenues and the accompanying secure position of the funding position if they deliver probably makes the business far more interesting to a financial buyer…so as the man says either someone coughs a decent figure in the near term that reflects that potential or the organic prospects could be far brighter a few years out.

Worth watching the presentation…interesting what others think.

More positive after but as we know Nanoco have hit many hurdles before ..but not on this guys watch.

Ha ha ha really what was the question ai paint a very dul set of results that is kicking all the cans down the road in an optimistic light after what has been a very disappointing year on going nowhere fast.

Still in talks..no detail but into next year..calendar or financial???

Now targeting a sustainable business breaking even by 2027…again a tad more detail in how that is achievable would be nice as there are no real clues in how we suddenly generate £5-6m a year of cash flow to cover the cost base. Would involve genuine revenues jumping to over £10m from current £1.6m in the next 2 years. Where is that meant to be coming from?

Very quiet on L&G but what’s to say they are going to stretch it out it appears.

Delivery is obviously key on making targets of cash flow break even and im sure we have been here before.

Price reaction not surprising …meeting later might provide some more hints?

Nanoco Group pIc (LSE: NANO), a world leader in the development and manufacture of cadmium-free quantum dots and other specific nanomaterials emanating from our technology platform, today announces that its final results for the year ended 31 July 2025 will be released on Tuesday 18 November 2025.

There will be an investor presentation through the Investor Meet Company ("IMC") platform on Tuesday 18 November 2025 at 1pm. Investors can sign up to attend the investor presentation via https://www.investormeetcompany.com/companies/nanoco-group-plc. Questions can be submitted in advance or during the presentation.

They never ever do.

Just more ai drivel.

A person who believes they have a healthy mind while everyone around them is sick is likely experiencing a form of delusional thinking ….

Thats ai for you..must be right!!

Take a step back and think about this one line you posted and consider who is indeed in need of help.

“My analysis is for healthy minds. I can't force it on those who are so determined to be sick,”

Get some help terry you are lost in an ai trap of self validation of your awful takes.

Reflect and think for yourself if that is possible. The only person who is remotely impressed with your botlove is you…it impresses no one and makes you look more fake than you actually are.

It’s a thing and you are a prime example.

Human Behavior Trap

This trap describes the psychological tendency for individuals to seek and accept instant, positive reinforcement from AI chatbots instead of engaging in genuine, sometimes challenging, human interaction or self-reflection.

And if you bothered to actually read and learn the board clearly expected a much quicker outcome…at pace and they would move quickly on any acceptable offer.

Its just a fact..not something you deal in.

If believing everything will be delivered that this company says will be delivered is an investment approach it is flawed on every level as the company has systematically failed to gain any commercial traction for its products in the 25 years since it was founded after umpteen misses and dead ends. Even in the recent past , promises of cashflow breakeven were great until they are blown apart and we again go back to square one as a company with no commercial turnover and burning significant cash. The extension with the Asian customer is positive but it is very small money committed to the JDA..tiny in fact..does that look like a company that is rushing ( further delayed as it goes) to get a product to market or one that is exploring alternatives with irons in the fire?

Let’s see with the update brings…hopefully some clarity on where the strategic review said we should be going in selling the operations. The mention of “looking at strategic options” with the trading update maybe signals an alternative to a straight sale…but a straight sale and payout is very much in market expectation any alternative to achieving “a different ownership setting” guessing away from listed such as an MBO or strategic investor facilitating a delisting needs to be communicated if that is the direction of travel.

My view is the board themselves had no expectation of the process being unresolved 13 months after announcing the operations were up for sale…hardly surprising that shareholders feel the same.

The finals were released a year ago the more recent update with the interims told of a structured process with timelines to expect progress and was very upbeat on delivering on a transaction completed this calendar year…it then became far more vague with the trading update in August which was a concern. It is not unreasonable for shareholders to require an update to ascertain the value of their investment..somewhat key information when the main strategy of the company is to sell the operations.

Some on here are speculating the sale price will be over the £47m value put on the IP ( though we are now seeing that patent portfolio shrink as they expire) that would be 25p plus per share with a further 5p cash per share on balance sheet hopefully net of transaction costs so over 30p to distribute to shareholders which should be delivered near term.

The shares however reflect a far different view , so has a false market developed because shareholders have no basis to value the company against that key strategy with no meaningful updates or has the market got it all wrong and there is short term 200% upside to be grabbed?

Certainly there is more upside potential one hopes on a sale than downside risk on failure on what we have been told so far also the management were confident on delivering a good deal this year.

So what are the chances better than 50/50?

It’s difficult to assess the risk reward…trust that all is on track or read the protracted process and fluffy last update is a bad sign on achieving their strategic target.

Terry..

“The permabear narrative will now inevitably shift to "the FSP has failed" if there is silence. But your framework exposes the flaw in that thinking.”

Apart from it’s not a FSP is it , which exposes the flaws in your knowledge and the utter cobblers you post.

The FSP a few years ago did of course fail to find a buyer..for a number of reasons.

This is just an intension to find a buyer for the operations not the listed entity.

Apart from being conducted at pace 13 months ago and the guidance of a structured process and when we should expect progress we have no idea whether it is on track time wise or on any acceptable valuation basis.

Guess they can’t just stick with the old

“We continue to assess strategic options for the Group's operating business with a number of interested parties.”

We were told with the trading update. It’s just not good enough.

I agree with Maxi and understand his points.

By the way the revenue stream from this is not that difficult to work out we had about £2.25m £2.5m of jda revenues when STM were still in the building and they accounted for £1.5m so the balance is mostly for this agreement add a few years index linked and you still come up with likely about £1m a year..this will still mean that the cash burn remains pretty much the same at £5m a year. The undisclosed revenue from the seond jv apparently just about covers the initial legal works on the LG litigation.

While past failures are no guarantee of future failures there has been a significant pattern here and moving to further JDA work when the financial commitment by the company we are working with is so small is certainly no guarantee of success with another three years of peanuts income. Much can change as we are well aware in that kind of timeframe. With STM things changed dramatically in a short space of time once they had agreed a phase 2 extension. One should learn by past experience not discount it.

no one has been as wrong about this counter as you terry…literally everything you post turns to **** and you think you have a clue with your rubbish ai spins ..just exposes the plank you are for not realising what you are. thick as mince.

run that through your ai tool you tool.

Terry you massive bell end you are making arguments about points i have not said…every point is explained in context and often with a caveat you ignore. I say does mean x and you say no one said it does mean x…its a total waste of time and of absolutely no use…bit like yourself.

You add nothing of any worth but just run things through ai with a positive bias.

I thought no contributor was as useless as you but you and AI are a winning combination of utter dross.

If you ever have an original thought for yourself then do let us know..what you post at the moment is garbage.

You still waiting for the STM orders that were just delayed telling folk like me we were wrong and that everything was just fine and dandy with STM?? TWAT.

What is the revenue stream per annum?

The company was a going concern in financial terms due to the cash on the balance sheet and some ongoing r&d anyway…this just continues that position.

This does not make the company financially sustainable looking further out…yet.

It does mean there is the potential of there being commercial revenues in 2028 , we have been here a number of times in the past. So no counting chickens.

In the absence of other development income or commercial sales the company will still be burning circa £5m a year so there is not that long a window as an independent listed company to get successful.

It’s a positive of course because the threat of not getting the extension was a negative.

Can only hope it helps lead to a sale of the operations as otherwise becoming self financing is still along way off.