Member Info for Nanonano

The 35-50m figure does make more sense if you factor in Samsung's tally.

Perhaps Nanosys were supplying Samsung and Hansol was simply a smokescreen, speculative.

The company stated many times that pursuing QD suppliers was not a good strategy, so clearly that is a major shift.

Relying on licensing and IP enforcement has not done terribly well for investors up until now- they don't get very much out of it for the time and money invested, and the biggest fish has already slipped through the net with Samsung, who still remain top dog in QD based displays.

So what could be the value of any potential settlement from Shoei? As of 2023 they claimed to have their dots in 35-50m devices, so potentially significantly more in the three years since then especially with Shoei's increased production, but how many are cad free? The 35-50m figure from 2023 does sound a bit suspect, as it exceeded Samsung's figures for QD display at the time, when they had circa 85-90% of the market.

I don't think anyone can claim that the Shoei action was expected as a consequence of the LG litigation, I wonder if it's more aligned with the expiry of WO2005106082 patent, and they're now trying their luck to see if they can skirt around the other patents with later expiry dates.

The share price has been subdued since STMicro ended the partnership. There was a lift with the new CEO and coupled with the prospect of a sale. The second JDA helped lift things up, but clearly confidence in a sale diminished in the second half of 2025, and with the ending of the sale process with no offers, here we are.

I think they're simply now in a place where they have few or no alternatives. There's no other addressable market beyond display at present, perhaps one in the future with sensors but that may not arrive or it comes later than expected- the lack of candour about who the customer is and products is always a red flag to me. STMicro backing out at the stage they did suggests to me something is a bit off with this technology that's being kept under the rug.

I cannot envisage Nanoco raising any more cash on the market, and if Shoei decide to go for the long game in court, legal costs could seriously erode Nanocos finances reducing their cash runway.

If they get a deal with Shoei like previous settlements, that should lift the share price from these very low levels, but they would still have a finite amount of cash once more but still with no addressable market, once more relying on sensor materials coming good.

Definitely TW.

So in other words, previous management strategy was flawed.

You read like Terrorwit under a different board name.

If that's the case, why didn't they go after them following the Samsung settlement? A ton of cash in the bank prior to the tender offer in order to fund the legal team, so knock'em out of the game. That was the strategy of Hamoodi's gang, but Nanoco were scornful of such an approach- nothing much to be gained by litigating against QD producers was their claim as I recall.

Let's assume they win, or arrive at some settlement, what's it going to look like? Is it going to be a one off payment of a few million like LG, or is it going to be a recurring license based on per display or volume of dots sold. I wonder how things might have looked now if they had such with Samsung shifting circa 8-9m QLED and another 1.5m QD-OLED per annum?

There still remains no recurring business. The sensor supply has potential for sure, but it could well be kicked down the road or an alternative technology prevails like SiGe, which despite its shortcomings may be considered good enough and without the issues of ruggedness that impeded QD use in certain scenarios.

With display things are more difficult to assess. I find it hard to envisage Nanoco would have taken Shoei to court by choice, I think Shoei have forced their hand by going to Virginia. How much value can be extracted from display, who is supplying LG with QD's going forwards after the settlement, one must assume it's Shoei unless they're abandoning QD technology full stop. Remaining OEM's in the QD space AUO, Innosys, Hisense, TCL, Vizio (now owned by Walmart), probably a few of these still using cadmium, but for how long?

The market will look at where their income is coming from and quickly see that they have no customers- everyone they've worked with has either gone to a competitor or just stepped away altogether.

Subsequently they've sought redress in court, which is both expensive distracting and time consuming. The settlement amounts when they come have not come close to the original company supplied estimates for royalties they should have received. It's also evident that the price is dropping sharply on any settlements $150m to $5m is quite a trimming.

Jalal has been involved with Nanoco for a little over two years now, first joining as a non-executive director in December 2023 alongside Dieter May, the latter of whom is departing in April. Do you think things have improved since? Certainly not from an investors perspective- the share price is now almost a third of what it was back then.

It was only two or three years ago during the challenge by Hamoodi that the board were stating that litigation against QD producers was not a good idea, as the value was low. Now they're doing exactly that, perhaps with their hand forced somewhat by Shoei's action, but all the same it begs the question how much value will be obtained, all assuming they come out victorious.

In the meantime, the company is making zip aside from a small amount from JDA's, which are for next generation materials still in the lab and no visibility of a product for commercial supply.

It's rarely good news when the government is genuinely concerned about a company technology. They may take measures to block a sale or transfer of IP, but they won't invest in the company either, leaving the company to wither on the vine if they fail to attract business or inward investment.

With the ships purser promoted to captain. Gawd!

Even the paid for mouthpiece is struggling to find the bull case in the latest news.

With no takers not so much a strategic choice, rather Hobsons choice.

They're likely in for a long legal battle with Shoei, which could extend into years with appeals and/or counter action. Such a situation could extend beyond the life of Nanoco if they fail to find some serious business in sensing.

So trimming costs beyond the basics to support the R&D for the JDA's is likely to be their only option beyond throwing the towel in and reverting to an IP shell, as raising any more cash without a nailed on contract for supply is exceedingly remote.

A publicly traded company is always potentially up for sale, all they need to do is pitch an offer, or buy up in excess of 30% of the stock and then make the bid, but I don't see that happening unless something pretty dramatic happens.

A lot of assumptions there Sammy88.

We don't know of they were a bidder, they may simply be instigating this action as a consequence of the EU legislation and the litigation against a major customer LG.

"Why would the Government think to block a company that has no commercial revenues declining IP portfolio and the end products are in displays or maybe SWIR sensors."

Because that's not the only application. Encryption, defence use, quantum computing etc. Nanoco have had grants for this sort of work, commercial prospects are probably far away or non-existent but governments won't be concerned about that.

They may not have sought to fully block a deal, but they may have wanted certain criteria to apply e.g. non transfer of certain IP, which might have made acquisition less attractive and lowered the value.

When a company is not named or a product line identified it's a sure sign that the technology is at best a possibility. Look at all the smoke and mirrors with STMicro and Apple, all of which came to nought. What happened with display will very likely happen with sensors too.