RE: Thanks for nothing7 Nov 2024 12:19
Samsung had the capacity and will to stretch out legal action for as long as they wished. They’ve demonstrated the will to do so on many occasions too. Nanoco didn’t really have that luxury. Had they an established market elsewhere, things would have been different I’m sure, and Samsung may have been more cooperative, but it wasn’t the case and Nanoco would have been bust or close to it by now if legal action was still ongoing, bearing in mind what has happened with STMicro.
I do think management were premature in distributing as much of the award as they did via tender offer, but then we should balance that with the understanding that if they cannot achieve some trade within the next year or two, then competitions may well chip away at any market as certain patents expire.
BT stayed too long, and really a new ceo should have been in place once the settlement was agreed. He had his opportunity, but it hasn’t worked out. Whether recent events have broken the company remains to be seen, although the share value is not looking good at all, and I’m not sure where they’re going to source new business from sufficient to provide revenue of several million per year.