Member Info for Nanonano

'but it could be that the technology or processes don't quite work as they should.'

Haven't Samsung put that one to bed? Is 42 million and counting TV's/displays inadequate to convince anyone the process works, or are we saying they've done something special that Nanoco can't fathom?

Yes and that's why the share price is ten pence, or thereabouts.

They do have an agreement for minimum supply to STMicro should the product materialise, but the devil is in the detail- ho much is that 'minimum'? Also worth noting that Apple came to Nanoco rather than Nanosys , somewhat strange when you have a QD provider on your doorstep.

Ultimately if the court action is successful, Nanoco could become a company somewhat like Universal Display Corporation, who make most of their revenue from licensing patents for OLED display. The Korean OEM's refer to them as 'the problem'.

I'm more confident in the STmicro deal. It's not often a technology offers a tenfold improvement on the current state of the art, and with STmicro able to supply the whole industry rather than an individual customer, the market is much greater.

I guess there is a possible risk that competing tech comes along, or someone else muscles in, e.g. Nanosys are also clued up to the benefits of QD infrared filtering.

https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/rebuilding-organic-value/28010

No surprise at the drop, with very little positive news to report. The market doesn’t seem to have shown much faith in the new ceo. Barely in the job a month, so no time to demonstrate the commercial impact of any shift in strategy. Six months to a year will be a fairer assessment.

Past form suggests Samsung will duke it out for as long as they can. Of course if information leaks suggesting that Samsung are unlikely to win, then that could provided a meaningful lift to the share price based on possible future payments. Speculation though.

More protection on that 17.5p though than if you buy directly on the market. I didn't buy any on the cash raise- not that investors were given much notice or time to pitch in- as I felt the shares were very likely to revisit past territory, and decided to keep my powder dry.

Bullish presentations require substance to provide any meaningful and long lasting lift to a share prices value. Anything otherwise means bullish swiftly turns to bullsh#t. The statement’s were clear, there are prospects, but meaningful revenue is still somewhat down the road, and nothing can be guaranteed. Those looking to make a quick profit from the Samsung case may have to wait longer than they’d hoped to.

For those that may have missed this mornings presentation, here is a link.

https://tinyurl.com/y26exbof

The depth of infringement seems to be very much higher than previous cases against Samsung. Previous cases seems to pivot on infringement on maybe one or two patents, with Nanoco it's into double figures.

Very refreshing to finally have a straight talking CEO with realistic forward looking statements, a refreshing change from Michael Edelman's ambiguous drawl.

The STM contract does have the potential to be huge, much larger than the Apple contract, because STM supply pretty much everyone- you'll be hard pressed to find any smart phone or tablet which doesn't have several of their chips inside.
Naturally the chief risk is that STM decide to move on without going into production, which BT did point out, something his predecessor probably would not have done.

Also interesting that BT confirmed that Nanosys do have fuilly CAD free dots, I believe that is the first time a Nanoco CEO has confirmed this, and I believe that the display market is largely lost to them now, but time will tell I guess.

Some mention of Quantum dots in this article, but nothing much specific, but a lot of the architecture suggests that QD's would very likely play a significant part.

https://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2020/10/apple-is-working-on-thinner-next-gen-micro-led-displays-with-integrated-solar-cells-multiple-display-devices-and-much-more.html

They're usually at their most eloquent when raising funds.

Yes they did.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/NANO/notice-of-results-6sfio7albvk220t.html

I'd agree with that, although they don't have top mention Apple by name of course. Clutching at straws perhaps?

Think we probably have a while to wait yet before we receive any game changing news that will affect the share price, at least in the positive sense.

I don't believe the directors and senior managers hold any other positions outside of Nanoco.

They'll encourage traders to buy one day and sell the next. We know news of one type or another is going to drop this month.

Foxconn are reportedly developing micro LED AR glasses with QD's. Don't know who is supply the QD's, but interesting all the same. More here-

https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20200930PD207.html

I wonder if Nanoco are connected with some of Apple's new range of products coming through the pipeline. there's been delay i releasing the iphone 12 until next month, and our end of year update has been delayed. In addition much talk of mini-LED in some of Apples line including but not limited to the next ipad pro. Will this include QD's I wonder? If so could a supply contract be from Nanoco? We do know that Apple will not entertain the use of Cadmium.

"Why are we left conjecturing? Nanoco needs to release the facts."

A common complaint from Nanoco investors over the years. Perhaps Octobers end of year update, when it comes, will tidy up a few loose ends, but I doubt it somehow. I can hear it now- "We'd like to talk more about the Samsung case, but owing to legal reasons, naturally we cannot."