Member Info for Nanogeddon

I'd like to echo what Intrusivethought said :D

I'm with you - thanks Barbon.

Barbon, I don't know how the sliding scale works but here is what BT said: The funder will get 50% of a modest award, and 20% of a high award.
He did not say that there was any fixed level of funder's fees that would result in Nanoco getting less than 50%. It may be possible but there has been no information provided to indicate that was the case. Correct me if I am wrong.

Sorry Barbon. That's not correct. The funder gets a smaller proportion (BT quoted 20% but not necessarily exactly 20%) of a larger award.

The funder gets approx 20% of a high award, and approx 50% of a modest award.

This could blow many of our pension limits… what to do… what to do…. Let hope Truss thinks it fair to raise the lifetime allowance. :)

Can anyone tell me any other patent disputes that are in progress and where a party has a large legal funder behind them?

Guilty! :D

Surely we will all be glued to the screen throughout the week of 12-16th and we'll know the verdict?!

Sorry, but it seems to me that the concept of LOAM driving the share price down in order to be able to buy at a lower price is non-sense.
Firstly, they will hammer their £28m holding.
Secondly, if that was their aim, they would do it by selling far more shares than they are doing. Rather, it appears that they are trying to de-risk (to some degree) WITHOUT causing a collapse of the price.
Thirdly, who would do this when the company has really good odds at winning and good prospects??
Fourthly, why have they been around so long, and are only selling (a small proportion of their holding) now??
Fifth, it tends to be done by traders who are shorters (of duff companies) rather than holders. Large holders.
.... If I am not mistaken? :D

Thanks everyone, especially Feeks for all the information. This would much more nerve wracking without your input.

Someone recently posted this:

www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/still-alive-the-german-automatic-5297840/

“ German courts have traditionally granted injunctions in patent cases more readily than other jurisdictions, with injunctions granted almost automatically where infringement is likely to be established and there is no overwhelming probability that the patent would be declared invalid.”

Surely the biggest win for us is the future royalty? If we can get an injunction, we have the option to set the royalty rate as high as we like provided it isn't prohibitive to Samsung's continuation of selling TVs.... Don't we?

You don't have to prove anything. It was just a stupid infantile argument.

I need my head examined because you claim to have so many shares?

"I’m holding 000k’s of these so if anyone thinks I’m a deramper working on an agenda for higher powers needs their head examined."
Nonsense and Infantile argument as have provided no evidence that you have any shares at all.

As I read these posts, I am now utterly convinced that NigWitty owns no shares at all.

They both generally get max one 'recommend' LOL

Does anyone know whether NGR is NigWitty?

For the record I very much hope they will not settle. I want a brutal damages award on file.

I doubt that they will settle, although some indicate there is a possibility. Anything is possible.