The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
Buybacks have to be reported asp at latest pre open next day…so appears Nanoco did not buy any yesterday…one wonders if they are in the market today judging by how the shares are behaving?
Paid 18p for a few…hoping to replace position in value with over 30% more shares but not in great hurry so will try to pick up on weakness.
Maybe there is something in it after all and doing your homework ..rather than just saying that it’s nonsense and would just rally as there were no sellers and that some who put forward fact based cases targeting 17p knew nothing?? Just saying. Bought only 10% back of the 100% sold so far so patience seems to be a virtue. Hope not too many got panicked in by the supposed new reality at 23p. Might pop some limits in.
Yep sorry missed one days purchase in share tally not in cash. The cost will be higher than your figure once stamp and commission added so i think £1.297m is minimum spent so far . ..which equates to 20.66p per share.
Still might prove to have been rather generous when the company was paying over 23p in the market..around the time sales to cover director taxes were made.
For anyone interested i think before today they have bought just over 6m share back for just under £1.3m for an average 21.23p…
They have reduced their purchase amount but still account for most of the buying on any given day..close to 50% ..but they seem to be drifting even with that support. It makes sense the company buys back as low as possible and not give an exit higher than necessary to those who want out. With an average 21.23p they already look to have been rather generous.
Nanonano you are posting on a thread called buy back print asking whether commenting on the share buyback prints is relevant.
In the absence of anything else not trolled over endlessly its about all there is to discuss…the fact we have no knowledge of what product its in or what end user /market there may be has been somewhat covered already.
If anyone has anything that throws any light on the detail of the promised commercial build up then please post.
Well looks like the broker messed up the buy back print put it in at the wrong price then reversed it which has boosted the volume…should have just cancelled the trade and printed again…now it looks like painting the tape to make it look like there was more volume!
Makes you wonder.
The thing is we have worked on the materials for 2 years plus earlier work ? and i would imagine that what the company produce is not immediately replicable and that they have sought to protect their methods and processes along the way so one would hope they are ahead of competitors in how they go about things after that time and are capable of producing consistent commercial volumes..as they have told us they have the capacity to do. Also as far as i am aware Nanoco do not have an exclusive agreement with STM so publicising their materials are being used by someone like STM would be an enormous plus in seeking other markets i would have thought.
What’s odd is that with STM there has been no secret in how they are getting improved performance from short and near wave infrared sensors ..they very publicly have demonstrated at trade fairs as easily found and have even released a scientific paper on the subject ..all over the past several years ahead of apparently launching a commercial product incorporating the benefits of QDs in SWIR …yet they never mention the product or where they get the super dupa dots in their film from as far as i can tell. The commercial sensitivity in them producing such a product is not at all secret and the fact they have had a development agreement with Nanoco that has been extended is far from secret.It becomes increasing difficult to see what commercial Sensitivity is involved and why! You would have thought like Samsung the benefits of using new QD technology in what is presumably an industry leading new product might have been up front and centre in any marketing and product spec…yet nothing and never any recognition of Nanoco “a world leader” in QD developments involvement.
I was referring to the legal ability not the commercial ability which has been clearly demonstrated by others producing quality mass commercial product , something Nanoco is yet to prove.the article was interesting more in terms of how slow moving regulation is and the carve outs that happen which means the CFQD argument has not panned out in the way many expected a decade ago…and still is somewhat opaque how in moves forwards on some devices.
Much is made os the company’s apparently unique ability to produce CFQDs at scale , this is an interesting piece from a few months ago and i can’t remember if it was posted..anyhoo thought a refresh in the absence of anything else new.
https://displaydaily.com/cadmium-the-2024-update-on-quantum-dots-and-rohs-regulations/
258,447 shares @ 19.152p just over £50k worth.
Again if you strip out that print as it’s a double count they account for 48% of volume seems a number thats cropped up a bit too. So they must be propping things up as appear the only buyer.
All good stuff on likely product , that agree seems most likely we know of ..but still be good to have a confirm. Also haven’t seen anything talking application of that devise. The low power consumption a major plus for mobile devices.
One dat we will know more!
I think we know stm have never mentioned Nanoco or any orders publicly as far as i am aware , Nanoco has said that stm have led them to expect further orders so we have the company’s interpretation of STM s Intent. Mostly we rely on Nanoco saying that stm did not develop this product ..whatever it is to sell small amounts of it..which makes sense but then we have no means of really being able to ascertain where the stm product fits in the global market for SWIR sensors and whether the stm product is gaining any traction. Odd position to be in.
I queried the forecasts given by the company and its marketing research and was told
“When we give guidance for the following year we include assumptions about revenue wins (this is normal practice for most companies). The alternative is to explicitly state that the revenue guidance is based only on contracted orders.”
So it is saying current guidance includes anticipated contract wins..which is what i have been referring to ..they are not anticipating any material orders that move the revenue forecast at all , one given pre first order which was for £8.5m revenue this financial year. I was somewhat disappointed in this, as was expecting there to be some build up.
As stated before current guidance makes no allowance for any additional revenue above and beyond Samsung accounting and the r&d work know about for the current year…so nothing is factored into their guidance for commercial revenues at all.
Adding to that obviously there is expectation of performance in the current year in the market from the company and broker Edison forecasts..so if there was further small orders that collectively materially moved that expectation I believe they would have to produce a trading update as soon as they were aware such guidance was wrong ..a “likely to be higher than current market forecasts” so the research could be updated.. The financial year closes in July and they often produce a standard update in early August.