Member Info for Kooba

You are such a child ...and my time is too precious to be dealing with childish questions incessantly as much as you like the attention. Post your childish drivel ..its just irrelevant and rather boring.

It does look like some are starting to cotton on though..even with a reduced number of shares in issue! ..as i said i don’t believe in magic…its just temporary sleight of hand thats all.

Seems LOAM do ..but they are smart guys.

Because there are idiots who don’t understand ex entitlement adjustment and make it up as they go along is my only explanation…i hope that helps.

I think charty is broken ..maybe turn off and turn back on again.

Remember this a few days ago when the price was 23p charty??

Yes, the cash balance has reduced, but so has the number of shares issued. So the impact on the share price is more less ZERO.

Like the capitals really stresses the fact you know jack.

Sweaty.

Charty my opinion was never the cash value if you bother to look it was cash value plus an extrapolation of the EV divided by the reduced shares in issue so was around 17p on a like for like basis. No point in lying sunshine. The cash is indeed 13p and the apportionment of the EV from 324m shares applied to the reduced 200m shares outstanding giving 4p based on a price of 20.5p pre tender where there was 18p cash and 2.5p EV.

So don’t make things up.

Charty yesterday

Summary of today. Kooba made clear he took the tender offer and has obviously an interest to buy back at a lower price. this is what everyone else needs to know when reading his posts. GLA

Charty today

I think it's great that there are people who are selling at this price. I can buy back shares at a lower price and Nanoco will be thrilled too. It can buy back significantly more shares at a lower price. Win-win situation

So you tendered and want the price down to buy back…something you guys were shouting at me as being a short term trader/chancer ..it truly is comedy.

Apparently you are not allowed views…hope no-one got suckered in on the puffing 20% higher up !

I personally am in no hurry to replace any sold just yet.

Please do not take that as advice as i am unaware of everyone’s circumstances.

Those who did not tender as are very long term i respect your view as you do indeed own more of the upside if/when the company delivers and if they do the shares should respond very positively from these levels…we just need some evidence of traction.

Yes you would have to announce a fall below 3% but not necessarily what the resulting holding was..so you could say no longer has a notifiable interest..so could have anything up 2.99% left so could still be a significant holder but would no longer need to report any sales.

How the hell would i know..since he appears no fan of the incumbent management and i believe has a city background so can do basic math , that might be a pointer i would guess. I do not see that what he does is as sensitive to the share price as the largest institutional holder where we actually know what they have done. We will have to wait like anyone else as to whether there is a disclosable change as with the other shareholders over 3%.

Though what individual shareholders do will not define the ultimate success or otherwise of the company’s IP backed materials being commercially adopted in mass market products creating the growing revenues to produce sustainable profits thats down to the management to deliver as they have guided to. Whether shareholders trust that delivery or not will be the big influence on short term investment decisions and the sentiment around the share price.

But the only major institutional holder taking a liquidity event they approved of and exiting the maximum amount and a large part of their holding is not always seen as positive by most.

We may well see other disclosures coming through on previously declared holders if they over or under subscribed shortly.

A gent.

I think the Vision Pro ship has sailed ..certainly the gen 1 one as BT has guided that he thinks it unlikely the materials are currently contained in any commercially available product.

I have no idea what it demonstrates but it certainly indicates they don’t see the shares going over 24p in the short term you must think. As to whether they are looking to buy back lower having calculated the post tender valuation or move on ..no idea.

My point on them meeting the management after the results as would likely be the case as the largest shareholder who gets consulted was not that they might have been told anything not in the public domain but they obviously were not inclined to think there is anything transformational short term ( not something the company is promising anyway) one must think or be paying much attention to the Cavendish share price target.

Their next move if there is one will be interesting as will any other disclosures in major holders.

They had to tender the whole holding to get the outcome ..tendering 68.5% of holding they would only have sold 49.6% of the excess over 38.5% and ended up selling 53.5% of their holding.

It is impossible they sold what the did and did not tender all their shares.

Westham..

“If you can do some basic maths you'll also be able to work out that LOAM didn't tender 100% of their shares (I've seen somebody else quite a % figure very close to that which I've calculated, dont recall who as it's so hard to sift through all the nonsense on here these days).”

So they had 53,790, 629 shares as declared 16.58% of the 324m shares outstanding

They end up with 16,945,280 shares 8.51% of the post tender outstanding.

Their holding has reduced by 68.5%

So their basic entitlement was to sell 38.5% =20,709,392 shares

But they sold 36845349 shares..excess of 16,135.957 shares.

If they tendered their whole holding and got 49.6% sold being the stated excess accepted they would have sold a further 16m odd as they got accepted.

Yes LOAM did tender their entire holding there is no way they could have sold 68.5% as they did if they hadn’t.

If you would like to explain why your basic maths shows this to be incorrect am happy to discuss.

The tax is triggered by the award and not any sale. These are nil cost ( nice) awards so it is all taxable benefit.

The basic tax rule is that if the employee or director is given shares for free or pays less than the market value of the shares at the time of award a charge to income tax and sometimes national insurance will arise. The tax charge will be the difference between market value and the price paid by the employee.

“In order to comply with the rules of the scheme, a number of the shares will be sold to meet tax and fee obligations. To meet the exercise of these options, the EBT purchased ordinary shares of 10p each in Nanoco on the open market of the London Stock Exchange.”

So it appears the company once the exercise of the deferred award was triggered bought 928580 in the market for the employee benefit trust to meet its obligation and then sold 433982 shares to meet the tax obligation of it being a taxable benefit to staff as is often the case. So it looks like there was a 494598 shares net purchased in the market in the past few days on top of the ongoing share buyback. Allowing this to a major capital event when the company is in the process of completing a capital distribution through on market buy back looks wrong..since it was transactions effected for the benefit of employees know the dates and prices of such transactions would be appropriate.