Member Info for Kooba

There is an ongoing obligation to inform the market of any information that can be deemed price sensitive ..if they are in advanced talks for the sale of all operating assets ..we should know. Equally if there has been no acceptable IOIs in the timeline they have given shareholders ( end June) then again we should be informed if the process is being extended or whether they intend continuing to seek a buyer.

There is an ongoing obligation as a listed company to keep shareholders informed of such price sensitive information.

If a party is in talks formalising an SPA then i doubt they will walk if the company disclosed this to the market. If however such information leaks into the market the company will (again) be overseeing a non level playing field.

They need to be careful how they play this…the route chosen ie not using a formal sale process only gives them so much scope around what they should keep away from the market…and when it is appropriate to update on what they say is a formal process.

I think if they go it alone they will have to address burn ..in the absence of the further hoped for JDA work before the end of this year they will have to look at the cost base to extend that cash runway.

The CEO did say there was much ongoing engagement for further JDAs so could drop at any time…but this work tends to be quite modest in terms of income ..the longer term Asian customer is only committing something like $1m a year…the more recent deal will merely offset the cost of early stage litigation so no impact on cash burn.

Need a few more to make any real difference.

The existing Asian customer could move to a commercial adoption position but the level of investment is so modest it’s difficult to see the work we are doing is of any great importance to a commercial launch.

We often get a post period end update around now…if not mid October finals release.

I imagine they can cite confidentiality and the need for quiet around the sales process..these quiet spells do not normally end well !

I agree but that is in an ideal world where there is a supportive buyer for the whole business …the world is not always ideal.

The idea that a large potential customer comes in for a stake even at a modest premium but gains a foothold of control could indeed spell bad news for shareholders …my point was it is not seen as their current intention but if such a transaction protects jobs and refreshes the bank balance giving a longer cash runway then it might get executive support.

For now though let’s just see if they can fulfil the ambition to find a good buyer paying a good price and paying holders out.

i doubt very much they would pass on £40m for the operations and ip think they would be **** a hoop.

£40m plus £14m in the bank less £5m fees for transaction and wind up?

£49m by 194.6 shares in issue bang on 25p to shareholders…thats towards top end of my expectation..unless there is a multiple party auction..but i feel if anyone felt that strongly they would have launched an offer for the whole company.

i agree that the interest of shareholders and the interests of staff and executives may not be aligned here ..but i also worry that the only serious offers may be just for the ip portfolio which would be problematic as the group listed entity would then have to wind the more complex nanoco technologies up which would take time and money ..so a lower deal for the whole shooting match might be preferable for all staheholders.

Yes there could be a highly complicated structure over a number of years or we could take illiquid equity in lieu of cash …all of which goes against the stated intention of being able to distribute the proceeds to shareholders and wind the listed holding company up. Maybe that’s why many have focused on their aim to achieve a cash sale and not on a scenario that does not meet what they have told shareholders they want to deliver.

Maybe they get a strategic entity to inject further cash into the business nobody mentioned that….because it does not fit what they said they want to deliver also. Best focus on what they actually say.

SmithyB Nanoco in the past has been leaky…CDX were appointed 10 months ago , we are told there was much engagement and they expected an offer. By now we should have received IOI which would be ball park numbers to take forward to detailed talks and on site visits and presentations. There will be intense speculation as to the future of the business in Runcorn as a failure to find a buyer will likely have profound impact on the cost base going forward.also there will be a fair few advisors on both sides of any proposed transaction in the know over an extended period now. If there was to be a generous significant premium being worked on it would find its way into the share price one way or the other. Very little M&A especially when there is a known process does not get reflected in the price prior to disclosure. Of course maybe just maybe it’s tight as a drum and it all materialises at the high end of some expectations. I’m just doubting that…wish I could be more upbeat on sale prospects.

Anything.

Terry..You would all save a lot of time by simply admitting that you don't know.

Next Steps - Phase 2

• Gathering Indications of Interest (lol) during Q2 of calendar year 2025

• In-depth engagement with "finalist(s)" (site visits, management presentations, expert sessions, due diligence)

• Final Agreement negotiation in Q3

So official line given is that IOI by end Q2 and a final agreement by end of Sept. Leading to a completion before year calendar end .

If 3-6 months added to those timelines as you ..or AI say…why has the company not alerted the market that those expected timetables will be significantly delayed??

The LG case and the JV were announced before we reached the timeline set for the indications of interest by end of June..as per shareholder presentation if both had added 6-12 weeks of DD then that timetable would need to have been addressed as would add 3 to 6 months to that according to you and would mean there would be no way of actually disposing of the business before the year end which is the stated aim.

Show me where AI said that and that you didn’t just make it up ..as you tend to all the time.

Either you are wrong or the company has misled shareholders as they maintained the same timetable post these events …. Which is it ?

Clueless ..as ever.

Dyor

The official line is that they would distribute the sale proceeds to shareholders and wind the company up.

Most of the assets and most of the liabilities rest in Nanoco Technologies which is the part they wish to sell. So should be fairly straight forward. They may do an interim distribution div , tender , capital return keeping back a small pool to liquidate the parent company ..delist it then pay a small balance to shareholders once complete.

See XLM in that process…they did tenders then delist and liquidation.

This could be seen as a vehicle or cash shell to reverse something else into but that is not something the management have shown any interest in ..and since Nanoco started life as a reverse into a shell at far higher per share value not sure if they would want to draw attention to that fact.

Whilst many still hope for a high value resolution here it is difficult to see that happening..if a deal is to be concluded by the year end then it would need to be very advanced already and if any talks were at higher levels £60m odd plus it would be getting reflected in the market value..imo.

So no banking on there being an acceptable offer myself…though any expecting some further commercial advances in the way of JDAs near term..will probably be enough to support current levels.

Hoping that this is put out of its misery though with 20-25p net to shareholders.

Happy to move on now.

Because when he came on board the company was promising near term meaningful revenues from STM leaving the company cashflow positive…turned out he was sold a pup too.

Now is trying to sell the business and distribute the proceeds as the best option.

A meaningful purchase to you is not meaningful to him.

“My four swimming pools” ..shared by how many timeshares??

well terry aka walter we will just have to take the word of a known liar and multi id’d fantasist that that is the truth.

those that have don't brag in my experience..those that don’t like to make **** up.

you sure there are 5 swimming pools in the southern tropics timeshare and the odd monster in that loch of yours,,get that imagination going maybe a few other luxury mansions on the south coast..pretty sure you mentioned that at some stage.

must be difficult remembering what you have said in all the various guises you have used.

Buyer at 11

AI Overview

“Sony is actively developing and utilizing quantum dot (QD) technology in their image sensors, particularly for infrared (SWIR) imaging and consumer applications like smartphones and TVs. They have developed a lead-free colloidal InAs QD image sensor for infrared detection and are also using QDs in their SenSWIR technology for broad wavelength imaging. Additionally, Sony has a QD-OLED TV model, the Master Series XR-A95K, which combines an OLED panel with a quantum dot layer for enhanced color and brightness.”

Wonder who is supplying their lead free dots??

Smithy there are very strong rumours that Samsung are activity working on sensors for iPhone 18 from credible sources not just vague AI.

Very strong chance we are working with Sony…no great revelation there as they once said they were working with the two biggest companies in sensors..which would be STM and Sony. Whoever it is they are committing less than $1m a year to the JDA with Nanoco. ( high conviction!!) but knowing our luck if it goes anywhere Samsung get the gig and we get left high and dry !

The thing with ai is really down to how you interrogate ..if you then pull parts out that suit and post your own interpretation of what comes out ..it’s just bllx.

Post the exact answer that says over 100p …so many ifs and buts and far fetched takes..just usual Terry tosh..but now claiming some credibility from AI …but its still nonsense…especially if Samsung get to eat Sonys Lunch.

Would be final insult to NANOCO too.

Ai

Rumors suggest Samsung may replace Sony as a primary camera sensor supplier for future iPhones, starting with the iPhone 18 in 2026. Specifically, Samsung is reportedly developing a three-layer stacked sensor for Apple, potentially offering improved image processing and performance compared to Sony's current sensors. While Apple has historically relied on Sony, this potential shift could offer Apple greater flexibility and potentially drive innovation in camera technology

Oh do bore off Terry..you have never had a correct and original idea on this counter yet…relying on Artificial intelligence just underlines your personal lack of substance.

Bet the machine agrees with that!

Well Terry we could play that game on some of your posts which are all wrong see how they fair…as it goes just cant be bothered..because its boring. How’s that $130m licence agreement in the settlement holding up to such scrutiny though…glad AI is exposing your lack of knowledge…maybe try and learn something.