Member Info for Nanogeddon

Very bouncy. A good thing.

It's been a long wait for any news on other infringers. Surely they had the heads up a long long time ago. If they were infringing then they didn't suddenly become aware of it on 3 Feb 2023.

I won't hold my breath on this one.

The comments on here aren't negative. They are well balanced and fair.

Yeah - we'll take him. £500k basic.

Hmmmm.....

Is that good or bad?

No one at the top of a company like Nanoco is that stupid. A more likely explanation is that the directors got back handers from Samsung... "We'll have a public showdown down the line and ultimately accept a pittance of a settlement."

Very sorry to hear that Intrusive. I pray that God heals you.

Erm...... how old are you, Intrusive... ?

"However, BT has raised expectations yet again..."
Please don't tell me that expectations have been raise. If this is how the share price looks with expectations raised I would hate to see it with expectations dampened.

Can I ask then why you didn't sell your shares since a settlement of £50m was clearly going to tank the share price?

Thanks for confirming that you were very wrong then NGR.

You're right ddubya. NGR believed there would be no settlement at this stage.

"If you buy the share the day after the ex-dividend date then you won't get the 10p dividend but the share would be 10p cheaper."
That should have said if you buy the share 'on or after' the ex-dividend date.

"I don't believe the license is for anything beyond display."
I hope you are right Nanonano, but I don't think we know do we? Surely the license is for the use of the patents that were in the trial at the time of the settlement?

idontmessabout. I think it's less complicated than that. If Nanoco announce that they are releasing say £32m in the form of a dividend of 10p per share, then the share price will fall by 10p on the ex-dividend date. If you own the share before the ex-dividend date then you will get the dividend (but you would have to own a share that costs/is worth the extra 10p). If you buy the share the day after the ex-dividend date then you won't get the 10p dividend but the share would be 10p cheaper.
The market /market makers will move the share price so that the above happens.
Obviously this is theoretical, because other factors in play on the days surrounding the ex-dividend date will also affect the share price, but that was going to happen anyway.

Another important factor is that on the day that Nanoco announces a special dividend (if it does), the market will either perceive this positively or negatively. That will affect the share price.

Any clues on how well our 2D products are protected? Samsung are now allowed to use the molecular seeding IP for mass production - for sensors also I presume. And as Intrusive mentioned recently, Samsung Electronics now owns some of Nanoco's 2D patents.

So can we stop Samsung infringing? And would we want to be bothered next time for the little that it will be worth?

Are we able to protect the 2D products from another infringer if some of our patents were passed to Samsung Electronics?

Do we even have a handle now on our IP relative to any significant products that are coming to market in the near future?

And futhermore, 404x, why would they shut the doors and distribute the cash to shareholders?

That would leave them without a cash cow from which to pay their salaries.

If they were honourable enough to do that at the expense of their jobs then they would have continued with the court case and risked losing.

No. They accepted the settlement for the sake of their own jobs, because they didn't have the diversification that you and I have... and I wouldn't be counting on a dividend next year at all.

"$90m net by Feb 2024. It's so significant relative to market cap that their current projects could amount to nothing (perhaps this is what market is assuming given depressed SP), and we'd still be up from here."
Sorry 404x, but this is not correct. Why would we be up from here? The market already knows about the $90m now and it is priced into the share price.

Furthermore (as I said before) without a commercial contract this can drop a lot more. Why? Because whilst in theory a company cannot be worth less than it's assets, that worth can only be realised if a buyer can extract it. If a buyer came along to buy Nanoco to simply strip it's assets then the Nanoco shareholders would misinterpret this as interest in the technology potential, and they would expect a significant premium over the current share price. This would leave the buyer with no benefit from the asset stripping.

So I'm afraid that this is not good news at all and there is no reason to be "up from here".

Wrong NGR - BT misled us too!