Member Info for Maxi19

NGR, no offence but you probably work in the public sector where "shortly" means in a couple of months. For me, as a successful corporate worker, shortly means in a couple of days max.

NGR, how long would be too long for you? It's a sincere question. Next week? The week after? March?

Whether it's 2 weeks, 3 weeks or 4 doesn't make much of a difference in the round.

The point is it's rude and contemptuous of shareholders to have a whole year to get your plan in order and only get round to the details when you have the cash in hand. And when that comes after settling for a lower amount than shareholders expected and justifying it by pointing out the time value of money.

It's possible the swap had an execution date of 5 Feb because the due date was 3 Feb.

But if there's no RNS tomorrow I am inclined to agree.

Kooba the LTIP options vesting in July 2023 had a 27p lower target, so no doubt the board were incentivised to agree to the delayed payment to boost their chances of that target being met.

If we don't get an RNS in the next couple of days, I'll seriously question whether BT and the board are actually competent enough. They had a whole year to think about the capital return and the amount received was confirmed in the FX hedge. We're now nearing a 2 week delay, and this is from BT who wouldn't stop banging on about the time value of money.

As far as I'm aware those ifixit teardowns are quite superficial. They don't identify sensors for iphone teardowns.

Everyone's been focused on the sensors but could the AVP display be using QDs?

This board is getting silly now. RNS tomorrow? The board buying when they know the AVP has our dots? STMicro even telling Nanoco the product is the AVP?

People really will believe what they want to believe.

NGR if you click on product selector you will see different variations of each sensor. The VD56G3 has two listed as active. However, in December only one was active and one was in design stage. So yes it could be.

STMicro are a big supplier to Apple so I'd be surprised if it doesn't supply some of the sensors in the AVP.

The key issue though is whether they contain QDs and how we'll find that out. I can't see STMicro telling Nanoco, so it would surely have to come from a Nanoco teardown. Which could take a while.

I reckon the delay probably is due to the FX swap having a fixed date.

Private equity firms don't generally purchase companies with negative cash flow as they use debt as leverage and need to service the interest costs.

NGR, are you referring to my recommendation against a tender offer at a premium to avoid MAR insinuations with LOAM?

If so, do you really want TH and his crew making those kind of accusations? Why go through that kind of trouble when they have other options?

I think the B share scheme is the best option since most investors either have losses or small gains on their holdings and so shouldn't have to pay much CGT.

A tender offer at a premium would be so dumb given LOAM's purchase in November.

I take some comfort from the fact that the low share price means the execs' LTIP options didn't vest in July 2023 and probably won't in July 2024 either.

It's pretty obvious too that BT agreed to delaying the second $75m payment to give him a better chance of his July 2023 options vesting. That is to say, by freezing that amount into the share price it means £40m wasn't distributed before July (and those options weren't based on an absolute TSR). In the end the share price didn't even meet the lowest target of 30p.

I disagree with you there Kooba.

I very much doubt those patents were worth $9m let alone $90m. They were clearly sold for some tax reason for either Samsung or Nanoco. I do believe BT when he says they were non-core.

Yes a bit of honesty would do the world of good.

The idea that BT's bullishness on the case was necessary to show Samsung we meant business was nonsense. You think a company as big as Samsung takes the time to read what BT is saying?

BT's line throughout should have been "We're sueing Samsung for a lot of money and we're very confident about our chances, but there are a lot of variables in litigation outcomes so we recommend investors adopt a cautious mindset".

That simple outlook would have been miles better than silly statements about market cap and only accepting fair value on a worldwide basis.

My beef isn't with the settlement amount. It's with the comms that caused the inflated SP.

I've said this many times before.

We've had almost a year since investors sold the news and the non-cash value of the business is as low as it's ever been. That's despite news of commercial progress.

If you want to ascribe that fully to market mechanics then go ahead. Ignoring the lack of trust the market has in the board and whether that is justified is what any sane investor would do.

I'd say BT showed serious incompetence with the way he handled the litigation comms, and the defensive manner he dealt with criticism after the settlement. It came close to gaslighting.

That's a perfectly reasonable point of view.