Member Info for Kooba

To suggest every shareholder in every company must be delighted with the performance of the company they own shares in is such nonsense ..do you ever look at other boards?

same stuff different poster?

the situation has changed since i bought back all the stock i sold at 24p

i genuinely believed the company would gain traction for their wares and although it was difficult to “join the dots” on how they got to cash flow breakeven they reiterated that guidance and it meant there would be a significant jump in revenues over a short period of time to meet that forecast …and it had to be through gen 1 sales.

buying back in when i did made a lot of sense if the company had managed to meet its guidance…that guidance was reinforced with the results and with the research produced shortly before the profits warning ..again should have been taken as well founded.

then a week or so later everything is up in the air…you think i shouldn’t hold anymore …why is that. i am trying to understand what is going on …same as the company it seems. but dumping on the sheer lack of information they have provided is not necessarily the right move now ..asking what the **** is going on as a shareholder is.

it it seems that if a company announces disappointing news on outcomes or trading that you hold…rather than trying to understand what is going on and assessing the impact you should just sell and move on . not wonder whether the bad news is already factored in and there remains value. if you consider there is still value at a price but are not happy with the lack of visibility or where the company only recently highly confident on meeting its move to sustainable revues more than covering the elevated fixed cost base you can say nothing and question nothing. what *******s.

Exhibit A

they repeat themselves, a lot.

if you challenge their bull****, they won’t be able to defend it. they’ll resort to ad-hominem attacks (attacking you instead of your information).

X and 4 and 5 are absolutely the same for when someone is trying to deflect valid criticism of the company. Repeating the same thing over and over and having nothing to challenge or correct those criticisms with but dumb personal nonsense.

Seems to work both ways but constantly defending a company that has lost its investors significant value with disappointment upon disappointment seems just as odd in trying to cover up such poor performance as exposing it.

I understood that the core IP would protect 2 gen materials to an extent but not Gen 1 materials to any degree.

Does the Samsung licence cover use in sensors or was it just display. ? ( which is what I thought)

Wonder why the Asian customer addressing the same market with the top sensor company moved straight to develop the next generation even though Nanoco met all their targets ..seems they never planned to use the first generation that was developed anyway. Nanoco never guided that the initial research programme would lead to revenues as far as I am aware.

Nanonano and NGR ..yep fine points taken.

But we also sold 2 different gen 1 materials in the first order , developed for different uses one would presume short and near wave..so in the new lack of guidance it would appear both material demand is now needing to be better understood it seems.

Edison only goes out a year in forecast.

They are expecting £4.8m cash draw fy2025..but that is assuming revenues move up from £7.9m FY2024 to £9.4m FY2025….which as edison states “Visibility pushed back” and they and the company don’t appear to know what to expect. So if the revenue growth they have penned in does not materialise the burn could obviously be more …or less if they get more traction than they now seem to expect. The company may also look to reduce costs if the commercialisation targets are pushed back and they don’t secure more r&d or any licence income.

They could start to see some gen 2 income end CY2025 if lucky but more likely CY 2026..so no panic on cash if gen 2 comes on line when they expect…but little happens when they expect as they are at the mercy of their customer and their customers customers as to when they might get orders.

Maxi not saying cancelled …just that sales do not build as they were guided by STM and guided us…maybe change in an initial end users plans..but clearly gen 2 materials from Nanoco and elsewhere one would imagine are going to be toxin free and one must expect a better performance. If demand shifts to these new materials , that is a delay but significantly impacts the expected commercial and financial position as gen 2’s might not be commercially available for 2 years from now looking at the expected development programmes and scaling guidance.there maybe will be some small scale demand in gen 1 but i think it is clear from comms that they have no visibility of what and when might be coming.

Obviously they have significantly increased the fixed cost base ahead of the build up in gen 1 orders so they have now got to a position whre they are burning 🔥 £4-5m a year now ..

Cavendish forecasting £15.8m at end of next FY…taking into account a good scenario one must think. If gen 1 does not pan out they will need to address this quite soon.

They mentioned the cost at £500k in the interview but good point so that £1.5m of the hole.

The company should also have received significant interest on the lump before tender and the remaining cash balance to the end of this FY of over £1m.

TG2D.

On your numbers.

$150m was $90m for the ip sold and $60m for all past and future licence on the core IP.

less the $60m costs left the company $90m net they said.

So $90m to the company ..ok.at 1.21 to £ about £75m…maybe take the £5m loan to LOAM /RW off that too. ..so £70m.

Well here we are 18m later the company has paid back about £31.5m to shareholders in the capital return.

The company will have £20m in the bank end of this month.

So that accounts for 51.5m.

The FAB cost peanuts they say £500k?

There seems a bit of a hole in where one might expect to be ..bonus’ and buying shares into the share incentive scheme might take a few million. But still from what we got net we were told and what we have visibility of leaves quite a difference to me.

Sort of more interested in them creating value for shareholders after years of cash burn rather than them all having a FAB time and enjoying themselves to be fair .

Be interesting if any move to meaningful revenues is pushed back to the gen 2 materials quite what a happy ship it is then ..currently they have cash for the first time and finding ways of spending it. If CF breakeven is 2 years plus away I figure they should be reducing the fixed cost base again quite soon.

So you really think they will still meet their strategic aim of CF positive CY2025?

It was key in their defence in gaining shareholder support last year and reaffirmed with the interims at the end of March…cherry cake and carrot ..all that kind of stuff.

Becoming CF breakeven through significant product sales is what a sustainable business looks like and what they guided to..you should recall.

SmithyB had also noticed the co- founder is now front and centre ..BT not normally one to hide himself away if there’s a media opportunity. So what’s going on, is BT on his hols when the FAB is launched , odd since he normally likes the limelight and this was obviously planned well in advance…or is there something more afoot?? Or is he just hiding??

Perhaps we should look at what is “unfairly negative”

I think most shareholders over the long or short term were anticipating the company to deliver a sustainable business, leveraging off the decades of r&d spend and “ valuable”IP portfolio. The fully netted down samsung settlement does not cover the cash burned over the years and what’s left seems to be evaporating rather quickly.In terms of delivering shareholder value ..there is a big fat negative on current valuation…maybe that is unfair on the shareholders that have suffered excuse after excuse over the years when the company has failed to meet expectation they put out there.

My cynicism and ‘negativity’ do not impact the price …the lack of delivering stated strategic aims and hitting guidance the management put out there does that.

You have so many concerns NGR it seems …yet call others with similar concerns unfairly negative. Strange.

I do hope a qualified clinical psychologist reads niges posts they are textbook…and they don’t even realise..such a rich source of research into projection .

I have no idea why they think anyone thinks they have any relevant experience at all ..they demonstrate quite the opposite. ..but if you need a new sink could be your man.

I have never claimed to be anything but a concerned shareholder of which I am…and have posted how I behaved around the tender , something I thought would happen and said what I thought would happen afterwards. Didn’t see the warning coming so soon clearly but the research didn’t align to the CT target.

Is it right to be unquestioningly bullish here or does it pay to do research and question…answers on a postcard.

Nothing much new but quite good on the space and even mentions Nanoco as a player!

https://www.securities.io/building-next-gen-imaging-techniques-with-infrared-quantum-dots/