Member Info for Nanonano

Horrible RNS by any estimation, but no surprise when the CDX was dragging on for something that was originally announced to be carried out 'at speed'.

Same situation as 2019/20, only this time their unlikely to be able to raise cash if required.

In the case of Brian Tenner and the Samsung settlement, I believe that LOAM would have been putting a great deal of pressure to settle, they were the ones really directing traffic, and they got the opportunity to liquidate most of their holding.

Ultimately a company that relies one large contract as security against the future is exceedingly vulnerable.

At least we know why Nigel has retired- he's getting out whilst they have enough cash to pay his retirement package.

Cash spend should drop a bit with the departure of some of the board, but then there's the cost of legal action against Shoei. So we can say that the company has at best 2-3 years before it's over and out.

Accurate.

I see the vultures are back in town.

Duff link-

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1768388916

It’s was don and dusted within a few minutes, nothing new to add at all.

If they have, and it's any good then Samsung would not have settled for $150m with Nanoco.

That amount might be small beer for a company like the big S, but it's still substantially more than the cost of legal action if they were in the right.

If they had cadmium free tech that didn't infringe Nanoco, with regard to Samsung's investment in the company, why didn't they use that tech and simply bypass any litigation?

It appears that when cadmium QD's are used in display within the exemption limits, they're good as useless. Which means if companies cannot match the performance of cadmium free QD displays.

Perhaps they'll leave it to Tuesday's AGM to update investors?

Hypothetical, but I expect there have been quite few smaller investors who bought in at the 6-7p lows with a view to a quick multiplier on the back of a sale, and have got cold feet and decided to quit while they're ahead.

The Chairman has lots of experience though.

I be,I eve I’m the case of the Chinese OEM’s they’re using cadmium dots, and using so few to comply with legislation that their effect is insigniicant.

It is a concern when the two infringers Nanoco have taken action against are both companies they worked very closely with in the past.

Nanoco have stated in the past that it’s very easy for them to tell what method has been used to produce quantum dots and if it is using their patented process.

Well there's been a lot of leaks in the past few weeks about under display face ID coming to iphone 18 pro max and possibly the pro too, however i recall similar rumours in previous years, although they do seem more specific and numerous this time around. Having said that, we don't know what technology they're using or if the leaks are false information. If they are going to be incorporating under display face ID and it involves Nanoco, then I'd have thought we'd have heard about it by now? All Nanoco have said is that they expect to be self sustaining by 2027, which suggests they have some kind of order book in mind, but naturally we have been here before, and they haven't said when in 2027?

A lot was placed on the STMicro contract. It’s telling when the new CEO states that the company had not been putting itself out there in the market, this long after they had enough cash to push themselves, further evidence perhaps that BT lacked the skills required of this role.

Can this be turned around? It remains to be seen.

I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest the company could find itself in a position where it's cash is running out, no offer via CDX and then no further progress on commercial supply post JDA, there's plenty of history to support that scenario with Nanoco over the years. Almost three years post Samsung settlement, if a company wanted Nanoco badly seems strange for them not to have pitched an offer before now?

A much favoured phrase of the present CEO is “ a diamond in the rough”.

So something with good qualities hidden by a lack of polish.

Shoei seem to be the most logical candidate for a buyout, they have a lot to gain IMO from owning Nanoco’s IP. So perhaps it’s simply going to require a knock back in court for:them to put a serious offer on the table?

The chief issue with Nanoco is they've been serially had over by successive companies, and that still seems to be ongoing. What volume of materials have they managed to ship in their history? I think STMicro was the largest, and that was miniscule.

Any significant income has come through litigation, and that has fallen far short of the income they should have received, so ether they've grossly over estimated the commercial value of their tech, or they've been diddled.

QD Vision was bought. So was Nanosys.