Member Info for Kooba

Sony seem to be taking a more traditional approach to enhanced SWIR industrial application sensors ..for now.

https://www.ubergizmo.com/2024/10/unlocking-the-invisible-with-sony-swir-image-sensors/

My understanding is that there is one identified potential display infringer ..likely the one referred to in a previous update …but now they believe due to ongoing commercial infringement that there is an economic case to pursue but that would still mean that it has just moved above marginal, but still unlikely even if action was successful any settlement or eventual award would be a game changer certainly not after costs..and who funds it? The fact that some core patents have a limited life probably means any infringer will just stall for time anyway ..maybe they already are and litigation is relatively close ..time to trial could be quicker with the patents already validated but not by much. Nothing short term I doubt.

Yep i understand what Milkwood might want and have looked at the 2 other situations they have tried to keep listing as a vehicle ..i am questioning why the board of Nanoco have decided that selling the assets is the best course of action but are seeking to do this as a disposal of the operating business which would leave a cash shell rather than selling the whole company..

Both the board an Milkwood want the business sold..at the right price and both would end up with a cash shell without clear strategy on what happens then.

The interesting thing is that with all that has happened here some don’t trust a shareholder seeking representation to protect their interests preferring to believe a board that has systematically failed to deliver value and settled on what a number of shareholders thought was a poor deal in the litigation process but worked well for the directors and connected interests …who now trust them to sell all the assets without any referral to shareholders.

Does anyone actually know why the company is proposing finding a buyer for all its operations and IP leaving it as a cash shell rather than embarking on a formal sale process of the company.

The later would be a more open and transparent method with shareholders getting to accept or reject any offer the former leaves that major decision solely in directors hands . The former also means if they do find a buyer then the company will sit on cash for a while as an investment company and decide what to do with it…buy something else as a reverse transaction and change the nature of the business or distribute the cash to shareholders in their own good time maybe many months to liquidate the company…a bid for the whole company would be far cleaner and mean shareholders got cash far quicker and they get to approve the transaction.

smithy you simply don’t understand having 2 seats on the board does not enable milkwood to do anything apart from give their opinion on any proposal ..they would not control the company and it’s daft for anyone to suggest they would. if they want to change direction they would need shareholders to support that.

the fact the board has determined the best course of action is to try to sell all the assets should tell you something about their confidence!! why you think milkwood would want to sell those assets at any price i have no idea…nor do you. you think they have bought 8% plus of the company without doing any homework ..they are professional and successful money managers so i would think they know what they are doing…they did wait for the **** to hit the fan before jumping in and are one of the few investors in on the right side of current price.

i am well aware they are not there for all shareholders but they are aligned in seeing the best value for shareholders. my earlier point is that what might be good for directors and employees might not be best for shareholders , at the juncture i think shareholders should come first for once. how they are going about this by trying to sell the operating company ..nanoco technologies means they would not need a shareholder vote to do that under recent rules..same rules as how they took the settlement and sold £85m of patents without approval before…why do they not sell the whole listed business then shareholders can decide if they want to accept the offer ??? thats a big question !

Well Smithy ..some highly successful investment managers want to “freeload” on the board is your view…that’s just really ridiculous even thinking that …they might not want to squander the remaining cash on more chasing elusive commercialisation dreams until the core patents expire in 3 years and all the money is gone but I’m sure they know a lot more about the company than you do and have considered the position in a pragmatic and reasoned way with significant small company experience….a bit like the board did when they decided to put everything up for sale..you as a new small shareholders seem to disagree with the board as well as the” freeloaders”…maybe consider that all these folk maybe know more than you?

But remember ..as with the settlement the board can sell the whole business without a shareholder vote in terms of how they are going about this ..they are for some reason trying to sell the operating business and IP and will not need shareholder approval to do so…maybe some oversight is a good thing. At least Milkwood own shares and will want the best outcome on any disposal. Some interest may favour other stakeholders at the expense of shareholders so I would welcome that oversight so we don’t get sold short again.

The company does have authority to call short notice GMs (14 days) given by shareholders at last AGM ..they have used this for the approval of the tender as it suited them and they had only had over a year to get it organised…but it is unlikely they will give the shareholder requisitioning such a short timetable they will drag it out as long as possible.

Why do they not welcome some further shareholder oversight of the strategic alternatives?

Resolution 15 will be proposed to enable the Company to call general meetings (other than Annual General Meetings) on 14 clear days' notice. Changes made to the 2006 Act by the Companies (Shareholders' Rights) Regulations 2009 (the "Shareholders' Rights Regulations") increase the required notice period for general meetings from 14 clear days to 21 clear days, unless shareholders approve a shorter notice period, which cannot be less than 14 clear days.

Standard terms for calling an GM i seem to remember Nanoco dragged it out for as long as possible the last time one was called ..so expect the same. The arguments in terms of voting against resolutions here look less easy to deflect..they are merely asking for representation no for a wholesale change of the board ..so no change of control , just a large shareholder seeking to protect their interests…bit like when they put a representative for LOAM on board who then sold down their holding whlist holding that position. Hoping Milkwood are more constructive in in protecting shareholder value!

“When directors receive a valid request, they must call a general meeting within 21 days of receiving the request. The general meeting should be scheduled for a date no later than 28 days after the date of the notice calling the meeting.”

On current cash and burn cavendish are estimating £14.7m at FY end July 25.

So there are now 194.6m shares in issue which would represent 7.5p per share.

The ongoing cash burn following cost cutting is to be £5m a year which extends the cash runway a bit. This does not allow for further promised cash returns or for any unexpected incoming revenues.

One just has to hope they can find a buyer for the operations and IP!!

Were you present at the official opening?

Nope ..was referring to all the official comms and publicity around the event all handled by Pickett and the still in place CEO who loves to get his face on camera was nowhere to been seen and made no comment in the rns …but I think you knew that.

He “resigned” shortly afterwards.

Now to reappear after he has been replaced in all his personalised Nanoco kit….bizarre.

Well BT was nowhere to be seen at the official opening..so who knows why they think releasing that now when he is no longer employed or in authority is a good idea? All rather amateur stuff as usual…what is the point exactly?

Bizarre comms the ex CEO now kept on in a handover consulting role doing corporate vids. . Just weird.

In terms of wafers they had an inventory left from STM ..certainly can’t be sold on as not their devise…they need a new sensor partner and how long will that take to integrate in a new sensor if they can use the developed materials .

Post from the other board

“… just seen that all of TerrorWit's posts have been removed.”

Plausible deniability ..no footprints.

Pathetic.

There was of course Pickett who served as CTO throughout the Samsung collaboration and would have been more likely to know what exactly was shared with Samsung i would have thought?

Difficult to know where BT adds any value now there is one remaining r&d project and again we are led to believe the value is with the CTO and his team.

Maybe sorting out the termination of the STM agreement is something he can do before going?

It’s currently unclear after years of work what can and can’t be used by Nanoco and whether the company can get any compensation for early termination we were also told the agreement had minimum commercial orders in it so is that a factor? It certainly has cost the company more than they received ultimately doing the work programmes as far as i can tell.

There are no details yet on what BT will be getting or for how long ..i imagine he has been on full (ceo) pay pending appointment and now moves to a consulting arrangement. Full details will have to be in the report and accounts. Bit like Edelman was paid for years as a consultant they like looking after the failures at Nanoco. Why he is the best to be working with advisors on major strategic options when he is leaving i have no idea!

“Brian Tenner who, as announced on 25 July 2024, will step down from the Board but remain with the Company during a period of handover and assistance as the Company continues to work with advisers to assess ownership options for the trading business and assets.”

Hilarious..says the never knowingly correct on anything Terry FW …anyone with any sense would go and try to reinvent themselves again when they have called something so wrong (as they have before) but not Terry FW this time just keeps ploughing the same furrow of ignorance and BS.

Just how supportive do you now think Milkwood are and when are you expecting those orders that are just delayed , oh and the whole business is not up for sale you say Terry..things that you have “corrected” others on and were 100% wrong on?? There are so many more examples.

And what is your defence? Facts ..not one…childish abuse yep because that is all you have ..you are busted and likely one of the worse investors i have ever come across..just so gullible over and over again…just a typical inexperienced pi being spoon fed hope and thinking they are clever..but actually proving they are the exact opposite.

Feeks, II actually wasn't aware of the Viz character ..but what an excellent spot makes Terry an even better moniker now!!!

There is much speculation that Samsung may replace Sony in new models..

Samsung may unseat Sony as the iPhone camera sensor maker

https://www.androidpolice.com/apple-samsung-iphone-camera-sensors-2026/

Seems wrong on all counts there Terry..you know nothing as usual , the poster who doesn’t understand anything Terry is you …yes Milkwood have no interest in what is left of the qd business and would seek to sell it that is obvious …but that is the same as the board has concluded following the strategic review and have appointed advisors to find a buyer for all the operations anyway. Why are you always wrong ..orders just delayed, bt safe , Milkwood are supporting the company ..its all absolute tosh .

How are Milkwood going to control a company with 2 seats then ..go on explain.

Inbetween CEOs? ..the new one has started in the role ..keep up..the old one is hanging around like a bad smell because he has nothing else to do ..there are basically two CEOs on payroll !!

Does give me a laugh though watching you keep digging your hole of ignorance though..keep digging.

Nanoco currently has 8 directors ( far too many and some well past sell by) and 3 of those are executives..the Chair having served for 9 years is no longer seen as independent ..Fielding has been NED for over 7 years and Battersham over 5 years ..these have not been great years for the company shareholders in terms of adding or even protecting shareholder value. The two newer NEDs don’t own a share between them which is disappointing..Milkwood want to appoint 2 NEDs and it appears they have a very good track record for their investors and much corporate and listed company experience. They seem more aligned and likely realistic in terms of their view and as a leading shareholders deserve a say in the best course of action.