Member Info for Nanonano

Scale up was anticipated Q2 2021 at the earliest, with hoped for revenue in 2022. It's somewhat vague though, as it's subject to earlier stages going to plan.

Perhaps there will be some update in the interim report, but I think it unlikely there'll be much detail, sadly.

It means they won't be taking any CFD's or spread bets on nano shares. Probably factoring in the risk of a big swing in the share price as the markman hearing looms large. Let's hope it's a positive swing.

Cash raise is on the cards.

I don’t think they’re publicly traded.

The way they worked with them on the QLED Tv's? Didn't go so well for us.

Not sure what is going to come out of that hearing. Might prove highly revealing or be a disappointment.

However doubtful, if Hansol had knowledge but didn't patent it, e.g. they kept it as a trade secret, then it's too bad for them. IP can readily be defended if you can demonstrate you thought of it first by evidence e.g. patented. Without that, you're on thin ice.

Will be constrained by QD-OLED output, but all the same should materially at least double the amount of QD's required rising to quadrupling the amount required based on 3m screens per annum of QD-OLED tech. Circa $400m per year revenue?

STMicro's share price has been doing rather well over the last few months, and is currently at its highest point since 2002.

One of the things I've been looking at, which has been featured in the tech news very recently is the blood glucose sensors pencilled in for next gen smart watches.

Until now, it's required a blood sample, but sensors have been developed which are optical and thus don't need to pierce the skin. Samsung are apparently bringing one out in their next galaxy watch, and Apple are reported to be working on the same for their next watch. Reading up about the tech, it appears the optical sensor needs a tightly defined optical band of light to work effectively, and although QD's aren't mentioned, we know that is something they do very well.

https://9to5mac.com/2021/01/25/apple-watch-blood-sugar-measurement/

Absolutely. hopefully that will prove to be the case with the case against Samsung. Then we'll all be dancing.

I believe it's a patented technique for a more robust Cd-free quantum dot.

I see Nanoco had another patent rubber stamped earlier this month.

https://patents.justia.com/patent/10910525

The majority of the shareholding is by the chief technology officer Nigel Pickett who holds about 3.8% of the company. Unlike the former CEO he's sold relatively few of his shares.

Major shareholders as of last October.

https://www.nanocotechnologies.com/investors/major-shareholders/

The exclusivity with Apple (the US corp..) ended in December 2019 IIRC. STMicro supply to pretty much everyone, if you have a smartphone, or even a thick one, chances are there's several STMicro ic's inside.

That means a wider market to sell into, but it does hinge on the product(s) making it out of the lab and in to market.

Investors are focusing on the Samsung case, because it's the only one we have any reliable current information on via court papers as opposed to Nanoco might add.

$300m is not an acceptable figure, are you forgetting that the $250m estimated figure only encapsulated the North American market? The total amount would probably be closer to $1b, not to mention the harm inflicted on Nanoco.

Samsung are well known for being tight on offers, they originally offered Kaist $6m, court awarded $700m, reduced to $400m on appeal and a final payment of $200m, plus I would think some backroom sweeteners.

You have to wonder what's going on with GMT capital having more than doubled their short position in Nanoco over the last few weeks, then the share price climbs sharply. Something pongs.

I think Nanoco will ultimately be absorbed by a larger company at some point. There doesn't seem to be any rush to enforce Rohs with regards to the use of cadmium in display, and they only have a few more years to go for many of the key patents.

On the other hand, perhaps they'll be a key innovator with increasing amounts of companies licensing their technology.

I invested in Nanoco because they appear to have class leading tech in an industry that is only at the start of a major boom, but they can't seem to get any significant market share, usually losing out to supposedly inferior tech, or getting ripped off outright by the likes of Samsung.