Member Info for Nanonano

Forecasts often fall short. The company will need to demonstrate it can fund itself beyond milestone payments and cash raising by dilution.

Working with OEM's is not the same as contracted to supply OEM's.

Some may pan out, some may not. Depending on how you wish to interpret the information presented, they're either still working with them, but with nothing further to add on the last statement, or they've been dropped in favour of a competing technology or a competitors dots.

At the end of the day Nanoco have produced a tech, which companies can choose to buy, or not, and they can sometimes agree and then later change their minds.

No doubt we've faced a number of disappointments and set backs, but I'm not sure what you think could have been done differently to circumvent this? Clearly diversifying is one, and that has been done, but it takes time to implement.

Well it’s a guess not a certainty, but I based it on present levels of QD display(low). Samsung excluded as they have their own supply. Can you see Dow cranking up until they have inked contracts for tens of millions of displays? Are the oems going for nano/wah hong supply? I may be wildly out and QD display ramps with a vengeance in 2019.

Well they’re all Nano particles.

I think revenue from display is unlikely to scale before 2020, they should hopefully get some income from it, but I think it’s unlikely to be enough to fund the costs of the company. So the US contract is pivotal to them remaining in the black beyond next year.

I think it’s a combination of cost and scaling. Beyond Samsung, how many QD display models in production, a handful, and in the premium sector, so low volume too. Good profit per screen for the oem’s, but poor return for the component makers. When/if volume scale, I guess then Dow might take the mothballs out of their facility.

Just guess work, I doubt anyone outside the companies involved know precisely the reasons.

8k might be where the premium sector is heading, but that is old news and represents a small segment of the market. Volume in display is in the low and mid range TV and that is 4K. Few channels are even on 2k let alone 4K, zip on 8k! If sales of our dots rely on a continuously moving target, then they’ll never generate cash.

QD display has not caught on in the way expected. Only a handful of companies have models of display beyond Samsung, and they tend to be the upper end models, which are low volume, high yield items.

OLED retains the crown for high end sets, I'm sure the consumer will be happy to purchase QD LCD, just not at the price point it's been at. So I believe it will catch on, just later than predicted when some more cost has been whittled away.

With regards to Nano's dot's, I wonder if the companies have sampled, and retained it as a future option for if or when they need to use it, but until then are happy to use cheaper cadmium based dots/film. Just speculation, but it seems to make some sense. Or perhaps the tech still wasn't good enough, however if that was the case why would a high profile company like AUO use the cad free film for display of future tech at Touch Taiwan in 2017?

I believe that three to four years from now, you'll be hard pressed to find any decent display on the market that doesn't use QD's in some form or other. Whether it will OLED, QDLCD, micro led etc.

Whilst manufacturers can move boxes with conventional phosphor based tech, there is little incentive for them to change, but once one or two make a move for the lower end of the market, I'm sure more will follow.

It does seem that Dow haven't been terribly interested in shipping the odd ton or two of QD's- I think they want to be the tens of tons market, else it's hardly worth their time.

To those that think this company is done for, I would suggest you put your dough where your mouth is and take out a CFD in the direction you believe things are headed.

Nanoco are advertising for a 'Supply Chain Planning Leader'. Haven't spotted that before, so not sure how long the vacancy has been up on heir page.

One must suppose the new facility in Runcorn is being constructed to manufacture scotch mist?

I think the delay in display is likely to be a combination of performance to price ratio, and how that is weighted would be a guess on my part, but I'd wager it has more to do with price than performance, and that OEM's will make the switch when forced to do so e.g. late 2019, at least for European markets.

The danger there is competitors catching-up, and OEM's choosing to stay with the devil they know. Perhaps, who knows?

I thought Tenner's delivery was excellent, the facts presented in an easy to understand and concise way, with no flannel. Hopefully ME was taking notes.

This bit suggests that the delay may be down to the performance of cad free not yet quite adequate for production displays-

"'R&D activity changed focus during the year to improve dot performance in line with ever increasing technical requirements of the display industry."

Speculation is forming a theory or idea without firm evidence.

We know from Apples patents that QD's are being explored for multiple uses, and that they're constantly searching for ways to conserve and replenish energy.

I believe it could be many applications in the same device, and that details are spared else it would become too obvious who the third party is.

One of the things was that the solar power patents were considered integral to the partnership with the US corp. I have considered that perhaps they are using QD's to absorb light to recharge devices, so the screen becomes a partial charger for the battery. That would be particularly beneficial for smart watches, but woudl also have application in phones.

All speculation, but it makes sense to me.

I think Samsung are fully Cd free, Nanoco themselves have said as much and stated they're the trail blazer with regards to QD display. However Hansol are in house, and as far as we know the QD's are not available to other OEM's.
It does appear that QD display is taking longer to ramp than analysts predicted. Apart from Samsung it is still largely a niche product, and has so far failed to usurp OLED in the upper strata of premium TV's.

Lower priced models with QD's are still thin on the ground, and the ones that are out there appear to be using Nanosys dots (e.g. Vizio).

Therefore when (if) we get to see some serious revenue for display is anyone's guess, and I think it is that uncertainty which is keeping the share price where it is at present.

With regards to Apple, prior to the Deutsch bank analyst remark, even the most bullish Nanoco commentators thought such a connection fanciful. Not the case since.

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2018/10/a-new-apple-patent-reveals-work-being-done-to-integrate-a-holographic-layer-into-a-quantum-dot-display.html

Should get some update on progress with the US partner, but consider it highly unlikely Apple will be mentioned by name, assuming that the rumours are correct.

...could there be an RNS pending I wonder?

Have to have something to ramp about.

So where is the reference to VRS?