Member Info for Mattyboy-

The way I see it is that when Samsung stole and made money from our IP is that they stole the money that should be profits on the investment that I made in Nanocos tech.
I’m looking to the court to provide justice.
Is it a certainty?....no of course not and I don’t think any one invested thinks that it is.
Samsung are attempting to wiggle out on a technicality but Mintz’s £10m confidence gives me confidence.

“ If Samsung can convince the court that they themselves were more than capable through their own research to arrive at the same point that Nanoco had previously arrived at, then the jury may well decide that Samsung got to the same point regardless of what Nanoco did beforehand.”

Samsung’s Dr Jang tried unsuccessfully for four years to create CFQD and contacted Nigel Picket for help in October 2006. A non-disclosure agreement was signed and technical discussion was ongoing for years before Samsung managed full scale manufacture. The agreement was promptly ditched and a CFQD TV launched in 2015.

Samsung stole Nanoco IP.
Their only defence is semantics.

Samsung's defence is no more than lexical semantics.
They look weak.

https://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/shares/what-micro-focus-amazon-aws-deal-means-for-investors

Just a reminder of the AWS tie up. Said it would take a couple of weeks for Insti's to digest and approve investment.
Hope this is what we saw yesterday.

Market now realising that HP isn't going to take us down and with the recovery plan and Snowflake/AWS collaborations we should make our way back to SP previous highs.

Hope so. 44m UT on Friday. Strange goings on indeed.

As I understand it the UT is a SP balance point at which buys/sells can execute most efficiently. A book settler.
But the volume and whether it is attributed buy or sell? (Of course there is a buyer and seller for every trade.)

Someone been building a position? Maybe a TR1 for Monday?
Wouldn't it be nice if AWS had taken a stake along with their warrants.

That is extraordinarily high.
Hmm.

For those who invested in NANO’s tech, the court case is restorative justice and an unfortunate consequence of circumstance.Our SP should reflect years of partnership and revenue from Samsung thru our IP.For those who ‘invest’ in NANO for the court case it is a punt.For what it’s worth I think Samsung look weak and I think we have a decent chance of success.

Scamp....how do you think Solas winning their infringement case affect Samsung’s hard earned reputation?

Hi Lee....sometimes they get it wrong! I’m in NANO and some outfit opened a short at 9p a month back...now at 22p.
Lots of positives here.

No soggy bottoms and a big cherry on the top please Mintz.

If Samsung does have a genuine reason to contest the validity of the patents (in which case they would be certain of their grounds) then they should have nothing to fear in either jurisdiction.
Maybe they consider the Patent Board easier to attack/influence than Judge Gilstrap/Payne who have recently handed them their arse in the Solas case.

16-Mar-21 17:51:38 487.492 420,567 Buy* 486.80 487.00 £2m

This was an O trade, not the UT which also happened to be £2m.
Someone is loading up big style.

....after all this time.....why now?

- Takeover approach
- Dividend Increase
- Other Major Commercial wins - Other cloud providers
- Vertica spin up as a separate product.
- Return to growth.

Sounds feasible Bass....although I suspect 'the herd' will come charging over the hill at some point.

Just hope they don't ruin the great discussion board that NANO is.

It's a future entitlement to an amount of shares at a fixed price basically, vesting is the activation of said entitlement. Wiki it.
It is now in AWS's financial interest that our SP increases and thus I'm hoping that the £300M revenue boost is on the conservative side.

Hi BC...wilful infringement (x3) has been discussed here many times.Hard to prove but I agree if Markman goes our way that a buy out or settlement will be be highly likely in light of Solas case.

Your slip of the copyright/patent tongue reminds me of another recent poster who made a right tyt of themselves.Woof woof.

The valuation issue is down to the assignment of PE multiples based upon the type of business you are.
Problem is that we have an incredible product in Vertica which sits in amongst a plethora of other great but lower value and lower PE multiple products.
We need to strip out Vertica and realise its true PE multiple and hence value (to us as shareholders) before someone snaffles it on the cheap.

From the AWS partnership RNS......'The vesting of the warrants is subject to acceleration in certain limited circumstances (including a change of control of the Company or a sale of certain parts of the Group).'

BAT news is superb....all the big tabacco co’s looking to buy up a slice of the action.What price this in 3-5 years on news of a take out?The mind boggles.