Member Info for Kooba

Share Buy Back Programme and Return of up to £3.0 million

The Company intends to pursue an ongoing on-market share buyback programme of up to a total value of €3.0 million to provide a continuing value-accretive return of capital to Shareholders for a period commencing on the Closing Date and ending on, the earlier of, the date the aggregate consideration paid for Ordinary Shares under the share buyback programme reaches £3.0 million and the date of the Company's next annual general meeting in 2024 (the "Share Buyback Programme"). The Share Buyback Programme is independent of the Tender Offer and is expected to be undertaken using the AGM Buyback Authority.

Except as part of the Tender Offer, the Board will not undertake any buybacks of Ordinary Shares between publication of this document and the expiration of the Tender Offer, which is expected to be on 9 April

2024.

Pursuant to the AGM Buyback Authority, the minimum price that may be paid for on-market share buybacks shall be 10 pence per Ordinary Share and the highest shall be the higher of i) an amount equal to 105 per cent. of the average of the market value for an Ordinary Share as derived from the London Stock Exchange Daily Official List for the five Trading Days immediately preceding the day on which that Ordinary Share is purchased; and ii) an amount equal to the higher of the price of the last independent trade of an Ordinary Share and the highest current independent bid for an Ordinary Share on the London Stock Exchange at the time the purchase is carried out.

Subject to the number of Ordinary Shares acquired in connection with the Tender Offer, any Ordinary Shares purchased pursuant to the Share Buyback Programme may be cancelled. Any buyback of Ordinary Shares pursuant to the Share Buyback Programme will be effected in accordance with Chapter 12 of the Listing Rules and the Market Abuse Regulation.

“So are we saying that nanoco should ignore guidance from upstream in the supply chain and / or never give any reciprocal guidance on expected developments that might lead to orders especially when there may be factors outwith their Control? And unless I’m mistaken i think they said they were looking forward to rather than we expect?

No “we” are saying that the companys current guidance needs to be given such due consideration and the cashflow breakeven guidance needs to be treated with the same consideration that the guidance from june 2022 was provided.

You have set out why.

You have no idea what is the broker agreement ..was it for an initial set amount or the whole £3m…it reads like the whole committed amount but does not clarify.

The terms of the buyback specified there was no limit on buyback relative to market volume because of the illiquid nature of the stock. There is certainly no other reason under the terms in the shareholder approved document preventing continued execution.

Any normal broker agreement would continue to participate until the order was completed.

They would not want to miss buying shares back at a significant discount to where they had previously aggressively been involved. They would not be executing the instructions given.

They have now not bought a share for 6 weeks..

Neither the company nor the broker respond to polite correspondence on why they are not continuing the buyback.

Ike and Tina..and a few others!

They agreed to pay the minimum committed to and keeping more cash than they said they would anyway..irrespective of the self financing CF positive next CY and it took a while getting the £30m back to shareholders in the tender , they now don’t seem to want to complete the final promised £3m on market buy back , i just don’t think they are keen on parting with the cash.

“Production order visibility” that would indeed be a thing !

Second half CY2022 you say..

..as we move into second half CY2024..with no visibility at all.

They were certainly looking for an end use case to take them to cash flow breakeven in FY 2024..ie by the end of next month…and they were talking of order visability and first order CY2022….so something moved shortly after the fundraise i guess.

“We look forward to the second half of CY22 when we aim to deliver the other two significant value inflection points: production order visibility in the organic business and a successful outcome to the litigation trial. In particular, commercial production orders will be the first in our history and would quickly establish Nanoco as a fully-fledged and self-financing operating business with significant upside value to be earned in the many large and growing international markets that our materials can serve. "

“Depending on the size of the initial use case for sensing materials, the Company expects to achieve the cash breakeven levels of revenue noted above in FY24 or FY25. A high volume initial use case such as a mobile handset would result in the earlier date.”

This of course was when they were going cap in hand to the retail in June 2022.

The mobile is not really on the table now and the guidance has shifted to CY2025..So significantly later than they thought 2 years ago.

The talk of them always delivering on guidance needs checking against the goalpost moving.

My guess would be there is an end user and an end product ..the sensor is being incorporated into the device and the manufacturing process is being scaled to low volume mass production.and that the product will be in volume production later this year.

I find it difficult to think that stm has guided Nanoco to expect further orders later this year if there was an actual device in train.as Nanonano says if it was just samples that would be very low volume bench testing while the guidance seems to lead to an end customer and device to me. Who knows..not even Nanoco apparently !

The problem then is that even that volume didn’t move the dial in terms of revenues for the current year ..still 8.2M estimate before and after the order ..£6m from samsung accounting £2,2m from the r&d programmes same as last year.so whatever the cash figure on the order was very small.

Tenner says this could be transformational. ( not again !)

'We shipped enough material that we estimate there's enough for three, four or five million devices in the next 12 months or so.

Tenner says: 'We've already got the factory for sending material that can make 500million-plus sensors.

All rather depends on how many sensors in a device i guess..

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-13243763/Nanoco-eyes-new-chapter-Samsung-settlement-attempted-boardroom-coup.html

I think the idea there is that he was talking things up to improve the negotiating position..if that was the case that is rather niave that Samsung might have been influenced by talk..and if it was the case that the company talked up prospects above their own expectation then that would indeed be misleading the market and at the expense of their investors. So not a positive angle to pursue imo.

I am valuing it slightly higher than here on a failure basis ..£20m cash plus the likely value of the IP to a competitor if the for sale sign was put up…might be more than that? There is obviously the possibility that they deliver on revenues as guided and they get a new r&d partner and they get some display revenues or someone sticks in a hostile offer as there are no blocking stakes anymore..( clearly when the last sale process was done ..LOAM AND RG could call the shots..no longer.

So i see limited downside here and a few ways that the value could be enhanced.

Risk reward.but not taking the word of the executives for granted..far from it.

Look i would not have reinvested a chunk of what i took out if i didn’t think they would get there or someone takes them out before they do ..but as a shareholder am entitled to question how they are going to deliver value ..particularly with the backdrop of other recent events.

The list of positives is lovely as always and im sure BT appreciates that focus..but do you not wonder why LOAM tendered their whole holding or why RG and ORYX ( THE SUPPORTIVE Christopher Mills vehicle) have exited. They accounted for 38% of equity 2 years ago at the time of the placing ( they did not support) they now hold 8%..a big movement in shareholding from some of the longest term holders ( pre ipo) ..They are professionals..and clearly know more than me ..but have fully supported the board last year have tried to exit as many as possible…just before it all comes right. It pays to question and it pays to try to “join the dots “ on what we are told..unfortunately as many have tried it goes nowhere..which is surprising. But until there is a clearer line of sight to revenue build these questions will remain. Taking a small CO’s word for it is not a plan.

NGR it is far from balanced in terms of what qualifies as success from an investment point of view the company floated on a higher valuation that it currently holds..yes it has paid some money back ..but it has raised more than has been paid out.

A TECHNOLOGY company spun out of

Manchester University

has been bought in a reverse takeover deal which values the enlarged business at £38.6m.

Let’s not get into the cost of money argument as that would make the performance so an opportunity cost basis far far worse. The key role of the management is in value creation and building a sustainable business neither has been delivered…so far.

Back at you NGR.. “come up with something original” ..you sound like a cheap bit of PR.

Perhaps focus more on value creation.

Wonder if this has been fully commissioned on time ..whilst not price sensitive in itself they say it’s an important factor in existing work programmes and in attracting future development work.

“Building and fit out completed post period end for new wafer device development and testing facility (‘Fab’) to shorten product research cycles by up to c.33% and to support engagement with new and existing customers.”

“Expansion of our range of services to include sensing device development work when Fab is fully commissioned during H2 FY24.“

Might have been done already but would have been worth confirming as it has been a key investment.

This message has been filtered, please adjust your filters to view

No thanks..only ever blocked two others it looks like ..might clear them leave Nige on their own..I imagine they are used to it.

You get what you deserve I guess now you have logged back in…well done.

Wait till they get going..you will be wrong about everything too…no one is right in their head apart from them and their completely ridiculous takes that make no sense on any level. You deserve the attention though …so enjoy.

You remember not long ago you saying I should apologise to everyone for calculating that the price would come down to 17o on a like for like ex tender basis..that I was wrong and the price would just keep going up on the buy back. How’s that working for you…where did they close.

You hate it that I called it right and you made a fool of yourself ..again..as others on here that have had the good grace to leave. Self awareness as well as complete lack of market knowledge are your weakest points out of a long list. Do some research stop trying to reinvent yourself every time you are busted and come up with something remotely original and you might be relevant. As it you are nothing…I block you on advfn and rarely post now as you and your even more ignorant mate Colin..Colin and Nige what a pair..just resort to abuse all the time so you come back on here for attention. Tough you are now blocked ..you are worth nothing.

Culpability…I never adjust my post or change my ids as often as my underpants ..you can go back and expose whatever you like of my posting pre settlement..you will find nothing I don’t stand by. Jog on …thought you were band here anyway Nige. There is a reason you destroy anything you go near..work it out.

Terrorwit (ffs wac) I was not posting on this board pre settlement I don’t believe..yet this board is the reason that expectation was out of kilter to reality in your ignorant view.

Seem to remember your contribution was to trust Edison before you ran under a stone from advfn..nothing original nothing but parroting the company line. You are a fake..shame is you’re so obvious. You claim to be a long term holder you claim that you knew the settlement would disappoint the frenzy of bullishness in the market but say you never sold any…and you think your opinion is worthy ??

You said on the other board you sold some in the tender bought back straight away and saw the share price going only higher and higher fro 23p. You are dangerous to yourself and anyone who thinks you are genuine and that you have anything like a valid view.

Question