Member Info for Kooba

Talking of posting garbage..on the buyback you say they have until the AGM ..that is true however they said the buyback would continue until the £3m was exhausted or the AGM , nothing about stopping after a month for no reason when the price is materially lower than they paid in the month following the tender. You then list all the good things the company has guided to new artner build up of orders etc as to catching people out…well if that were the case why the hell is the company or broker given the instruction holding off buying any at these levels??

If you can explain the reason in your usually determined style that would be great..but don’t argue against yourself and exercise some common sense.

“Share Buyback Programme

As set out in the Circular, the Company will 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. The Share Buyback Programme commences today and will end 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. “

“ Nanoco has instructed Cavendish to conduct the Share Buyback Programme on its behalf on a broker-managed basis, with trading decisions taken independently of the Company.”

So why are Cavendish not continuing the buyback as instructed for the benefit of shareholders before the expected good news l explain that one?

You have to stick to the board approved narrative ( until it changes)

I am not as negative clearly as some as i have bought back in in most of the position sold.

There are a few reasons to still hope that the company delivers..predominantly if there is any change in the expectation of commercial delivery ,they , under their continuing obligations should inform the market without delay.

It’s frustrating the behaviour of the senior team and the lack of real clarity on a number of points…and that they do not reply to genuine shareholder communications still points to an arrogant company that cares little for the pi’s. But that arrogance might be founded on confidence they will finally deliver.

Anything soon…doubt it..the shareprice is always the give away.

Maybe the odd behaviour around the buy back is they want the price to drift to allow some investors to buy back in at advantageous levels before the next carrot or even an MBO.

Who knows but will be watching for any holdings rns.

Certainly if they fall well short of cash flow breakeven in CY2025 then there would be further issues for the executives…

They guided to a build up of revenues and further orders this year..many were anticipating more orders by now…again begs the question if the genuinely expect such positive confirmation on revues or the securing of a further r&d partner as they again guided to…why the hell are they not try to complete the capital return through the buyback.

The only reason you might not get on with it at levels that they clearly thought attractive and in shareholder interests a few months ago is if you thought you could buy all the remaining shares back even cheaper..i cant think of why an independent share buyback programme would be halted at all anyway but thinking you can complete at a lower level seems the only explanation ..but that doesn’t support the narrative from the company at all. Maybe they just didn’t intend returning the money as promised?

At least i base opinion on the stated commentary rather than make one up to suit a complete lack of other guidance or visible progress. But as you say you are entitled to an opinion but if that opinion was formed on anything but conjecture it would hold more water. I am sure you will change your opinion again to suit events when needed.

All leads back to the fact once again shareholders have to pick the bones from vague communications which makes it a tricky investment proposition ..hence the price.

Add on a moan about continuing uncertainty of what is happening with the buyback ..if its value accretive they should get on with it. 40 days without any activity unexplained.

I would say that the commentary by the company indicated there was an end user and an end product when the order was announced ..it might have been early days in terms of scaling and integration on a device but to me indicated there was one.

“CEO, Brian Tenner, said: “Today’s announcement records a critical milestone in Nanoco’s evolution from an R&D first mover to an electronics materials production company.

“With our customers’ global reach and ambitions for this technology, we expect initial low volume demand to increase gradually due to more end users and a more diverse range of applications.””

More end users.

More diverse range of applications.

Both indicate there is at least one end use and at least one application to me.

The r&d programme volumes included sample volumes ..if the first “commercial” order was just for more samples rather than a commercial application they should have been clearer as there are obvious implications on possible revenue build depending on end user development cycles.

On Electroluminescent Quantum Dots the company has stated that though they see it as the future of display they do not see it as an attractive market to pursue ..too many companies chasing the space. Who knows display will always be a big market chasing the next big thing..i am sure Samsung will do well irrespective of whose IP they use.i also think solar is still a viable market for certain space limited uses where far more effecient photovoltaic cells are needed…ie vehicle roofs. Anyway they cant be going for everything..they tried that before with a shotgun approach ..one just has to hope the rifle approach to sensors works.

I understood that the gen 1 materials can be sold to other industry buyers and there was no exclusivity with STM …whilst there is not the Apple case of one end user Nanoco seem reliant on STM selling their wares when there could be other direct markets for the materials ..i might be wrong on this but seem to remember the company being asked and saying it was their IP and they could sell the materials to whoever they wanted. It would certainly be a good reason to see the company promote the effectiveness and efficiency of their materials to a wider audience as other nanomaterial producers do at focused trade fairs.

What Nanosys are up to from a few weeks ago…mentions Sharp and their use of cadmium free QDs very briefly.

https://youtu.be/gguj6zn8IWI?si=rcwgHmmIcJT1W6Jj

“Some are confused that the first commercial order meant the sensor itself was being sold. It’s not how the supply chain or product development works.”

Some includes you , who spent ages pontificating on end devices as you were around iPhone 16 the other day. ..now you act like you knew nothing would come out from the first commercial order for many many months as has been the case, as though that was obvious all along.

You know no more than anyone and that is very little.

You stating how the company attains its commercial targets as being “not hard to understand except for some” is nonsense and you know it..now play the victim ..pity you.

The company says revenues of gen 1 will build to move the company to be cash flow positive CY2025 ..they have had one very small “commercial” order over 7 months ago and nothing else as far as we are aware yet are told we move from nothing to £8-9m annualised revenues in the next 18 months with no evidence of any traction or explanation of how the sales of our materials will achieve such feats . All you understand is to unquestioningly parrot what the company says wether it makes sense or not and be dismissive of others that others that actually look at the numbers and product development cycles and see if they add up.

But , but

“It’s really not hard to understand except for some.”

As long as you have multiple goes at guessing what might be going on with very little evidence and often conflicting with the little that is known..simple really.

18 months to 2 years to develop the gen 2 material with the 2 partners that company says are likely to be used in mobiles,if validated then another up to 12 months scaling and integration ( source company) so a mobile launching past 2026 sounds most likely. When does the iPhone 16 come out?

Just my take on timescales and information given by the company ..who have obviously guided to possible mass market mobile adoption in 2026 in line with some industry expectation they promote.

Is there a problem with interpreting that guidance ..seems one of the clearer things the company has commented on to me.

Short term revenue build..they state revenues of £8-9m*above Samsung accounting entry needed to move the company to cash flow break even ..difficult to know if that is pre or post r&d revs of £2.3m..either way is a big jump from nothing and relies entirely on gen 1 material sales in CY2025.

*Source ..48 mins interim presentation.

obviously not blocked you though troublesome, your propoganda ( s******s) is quite acceptable to carlos’ delicate disposition then!

Ngr its such a shame that the company doesn’t explain the timelines as you do with information you don’t know so well…unfortunately Ngr you were very much in the camp speculating on what product the sensors with our materials were in i seem to remember ..at what point did you realise that the company that led you to believe that there was a commercial end user back in November was merely selling a few bucket fulls for further r&d work to see if they want to use them?

On the interim presentation at about 38 mins https://youtu.be/Oun9bCyzCFA?si=rhfFhSllEjmnX6-6 they said their other customer ( the Asian customer ) “works with” the worlds biggest sensor company..in the relevant field that seems certain to be Sony.

https://www.edge-ai-vision.com/2023/07/cmos-image-sensors-sony-is-still-leading-the-market/

So we could be further from the end product manufacturer than with STM…but between the two companies they would encompass a big chunk of the emerging SWIR sensor market ,,they also indicate the Asian customer also has 200k customers.so presume the company is a large component supplier to Sony.

As long as they sell their wares in sustainable volumes at good margins I don’t really care who they go to , though further orders rather needed to boost market confidence in delivering their strategic goals.

Yep if there is news and it disappoints it will be due entirely to folks misinterpreting their very clear comms I'm sure of that and some can rewrite the past with the benefit of hindsight to explain why. Smashing.

Bachatanut..

Don’t think there is anything suspicious there is just little volume ..there is no buyback there is no news the price has adjusted back to a similar level of enterprise value as pre tender so adjusted like for like now. Jut think its dull and a wider spread because nothing is happening.

We have had a global market in big upward moves in technology sector..but Nanoco and other smaller CO’s don’t tend to get that excited when the big boys move these days.

Likely to stay the same until there is news..but think they have found a support around 17p for now.

So you are just making it up as you go along then.

Best stick to the brief facts the company has actually given rather than just making up excuses why there is no news..its sweet you try to cover their backs so much but i don’t think it helps just filling gaps in with your imagined truth.

Again at 40minutes

https://youtu.be/Oun9bCyzCFA?si=4fQtnMpPHgvRO0In

Since early 2022 or even earlier engineering samples available

“..the end user OEM’s have had lots of time to explore the sensor functionality and possible use cases..”

NGR..WTF is this??

“The fact is you misinterpreted what a negotiated settlement meant - yes you can cite global sales and fair value as many times as you want but you didn't factor in the discount for value of time and money. So you were not complete in your analysis. Unlike the professionals.”

Utter hogwash you have no idea what research i did or assumptions i made or what i thought was a fair pre trial settlement based of all the outlines the company had given ..you just lap up any old crap from the company such as the value of money BS..here we are 18 months from the settlement and they still haven’t returned the promised capital to shareholders. I misinterpreted nothing and read and listened to every company communication , but in hindsight relied far too much on company communications of what they thought an acceptable outcome would look like. And you wonder why some question the timing and delivery now promised?? Are you misinterpreting what they are promising now?? We’ll have to see.