Member Info for Nanonano

The one thing that does concern me is why it took Nanoco so long to call Samsung out on the infringement.

They say they informed them over a year ago, but if the infringement started from the off, I'd have thought they'd have called them out in the first year of production.

I agree that any influence between Dow and Samsung would be extremely difficult if not impossible to prove, whereas Samsung's infringement can be demonstrated scientifically, and in Nanoco's own opinion very easily.

Would make sense- Dow never seemed to put much if any effort into marketing the dots.

That stinks to high heaven.

Merck recently purchased a range of OLED display patents from Minolta to add to their extensive list- they haven't done that for giggles.

I think any expectations should be tempered with the likelihood that any payout is going to be several years away, unless Samsung choose to offer an OOC settlement acceptable to Nanoco and its shareholders. In the meantime we need to see revenue from other sources.

I thought the Deutsche Bank analyst asked some excellent questions. Sadly the answers weren't very illuminating.

Did anyone else think the moderator sounded like the computer from 'Dark Star'?

Companies don't seem to be beating a path to our door. Minus Apple and Merck revenue, our income struggles to make it into six figures. Not encouraging for a company fast running out of cash.

I wouldn't hold your breath. There hasn't been a peep out of Samsung so far, and bearing in mind past and current performance, they're unlikely to do the right thing by Nanoco now.

To a company like Samsung, Nanoco are small fry. A gnat bite on a tough hide- an annoyance but of little consequence.

Without display revenue, I personally can't see Nanoco generating sufficient revenue to remain viable in its present form if at all.

As things stand at present it doesn't look like they'll have sufficient income to be signed off as a going concern for the next financial year. That means either fund raise from equity, cash loan, contract with cash up front (fat chance), or massive restructure to a skeletal company- these appear to be the options outlined in the RNS.

Well lets hope we get some good information on the sale process and/or legal proceedings for patent infringement. Hope the analysts ask some searching questions, too.

That would be unforgivable bearing in mind the weighting of scientists in the company.

I still have a sneaking feeling this sale is tied in with Apple. They've bought out a chunk of Japanese Display, plus have a shedload of patents for Quantum dot use, and have a previous, perhaps ongoing relationship with Nanoco. Recent reports suggest the Ipad pro 5g with mini LED display has been put back a few months- perhaps that has something to do with all this?

Notification by Principal broker of shares traded during period of company sale. So shares bought and sold.

Where's the RNS then botbot1202?

As I suspected LCD not dead, just Korean manufacture of LCD being discontinued

https://www.displaydaily.com/article/display-daily/what-now

However if Samsung wish to maintain quality where will their Chinese obtain their QD's? From Samsung/Hansol. annosys? Or some place else?

Still no news, Friday RNS? Not holding my breath.

I guess it depends on how Samsung want to play it, and what they have to offer in their defence or if they intend to counter claim against Nanoco.

Certainly an additional risk factor, plus the dwindling cash situation, partially alleviated until the end of the year, although remains to be seen how they intend to sign themselves off as a going concern post September without additional revenue.

RNS by the end of the week, perhaps?

Interesting, and may have some bearing on sales discussion for Nanoco.....maybe

https://www.computing.co.uk/news/4013586/mps-urge-government-intervene-chinese-takeover-imagination-technologies

We're basing out assumptions that the 45 day rule applies. Does anyone here know if that is mandatory or if special conditions apply?

If it is mandatory, then all eyes on Monday bearing in mind April 2nd has been and gone.

I also assume the interims have been delayed so the board can factor in what the response from Samsung will be.

Don't think investors are seeking a blow by blow account of proceedings, but some idea of whether Samsung are going to contest the case or seek and out of court deal would be market affecting.