Member Info for Nanonano

All I can add is if they're out there, there isn't much interest in them at present.

Until Nanoco or STmicro either gives some conformation of the chips incorporating the tech and/or the order book starts to fill-up, we can expect the market to value the company accordingly.

Recent price movements amply demonstrate this board or others have no impact on share performance but the quality of company updates and RNS's affect things greatly.

Zero- until I see some mention of QD's from either STMicro or Nanoco, or a follow-up order to suggest growing sales.

Not semantics, facts.

None of the things you listed would be a result of QD inclusion.

The NIR loss reduction you mention is a result of the cdti preventing stray pixels, which gets worse as the wavelength gets longer- nothing to do with QD’s. If the presentation said they’d achieved a significant increase in quantum efficiency in the NIR region as a result of a proprietary coating, that might have given some pointers towards QD’s.

Some Brightsense sensors MAY incorporate QD’s, they may also incorporate a layer of Philadelphia cream cheese and be painted sky blue pink. It doesn’t have anything to do with Brightsense. Any QD’s if used would be acting as a colour converter, but Brightsense is all about the position of lighting and the photodiode positioning, but you know this already if you listened to the presentation.

IIRC, the only thing we’ve seen to date is a data sheet with a high QE for one sensor, and that data sheet has since been revised with that information removed, which could mean either the information is sensitive, or perhaps the spec of the sensor has changed?

Conversely perhaps there might be sensors not incorporating Brightsense but also use QD’s. Until we get some confirmation of what devices are using QD’s and Nanoco QD’s at that, we cannot be specific, IMO.

Brightsense isn’t anything to do with QD’s. If the sensor incorporates QD’s (and we have no evidence to support that) then that is an additional technology to Brightsense. Anyone wishing to view the presentation, I suggest they do so, but in essence Brightsense is about thenbackside illumination (bsi) plus cdti, which gives sharper and brighter pixels.

It’s an important distinction to avoid confusion at a later date.

Brightsense isn’t about QD’s. Perhaps some sensors in that range may incorporate QD’s but until it’s confirmed by them or someone independent, then we won’t know, but thinking that because a sensor has the Brightsense branding on it will automatically dictate it contains QD technology is incorrect. So one example could be an RGB camera without infrared pixels, or one with infrared pixels that don’t require such high sensitivity. Either of these can incorporate Brightsense technology, but no QD’s.

Well we know from past experience that the company does read these boards. Also communications with investors are shocking, emails are rarely responded to I find, and they’re not going to discuss anything that isn’t officially RNS’d anyway.

Nanoco’s tech is getting on in years now, they only have so much time to capitalise on their invention before patents expire and the competition can move in.

Yesterdays news doesn’t inspire confidence that they’re going to deliver a business that can break even let alone make a profit anytime soon. Nothing doing in display, and sensing is looking shaky at best.

Not much at all presently.

What kept me invested after the shocking settlement was waiting to see what became of the organic business in sensing. Sadly the organic growth is looking more like a mouldy turnip.

Unlikely to be relevant to QD’s. A number of innovations in blue OLED material means brighter and more efficient panels coming through, but they use a very different manufacturing process to OLED in larger panels, whether it be WOLED (LG) or QDOLED (Samsung).

QD’s are a potential tech for handsets, but so far they’ve not found any traction from what I’ve observed.

"I think you missed the point of the presentation"

No I didn't, the brightsense is to do with the structure of the lens and the position of the photodiodes, backside illumination rather than frontside. Some here seem to be thinking that Brightsense is all about incorporating QD's which it isn't.

"Nanonano why are you thinking that QD’s have nothing to do with it?"

If you'd tuned into the STMicro presentation you'd know why. Brightsense is all to do with the structure of the sensor, nothing to do with QD's at all.

Apple's use of a Samsung sensor would be very likely. The Metalenz polar ID sensor uses Samsung technology, and that reportedly gives excellent Face ID for a fraction of the cost and bulk of the system Apple uses. However I understand the Polar ID sensors are earmaked for Android phones accompanied with Qualcomm technology, so maybe not.

Anyone tuning into the STMicro webcast will know that Brightsense has zip to do with QD’s.

IR light is not around in sufficient quantity in all instances so in order the the sensors to work they need an artificial illuminator light source. SWIR LED's are tricky to make and costly, also not very efficient.

We're back to why would they invest so much- it's small beer to STMicro.

I recognise the lead content is tiny, but its lead and in marketing perception matters more than scientific fact.

If Gen 1 turns out to be a dead end, it doesn't follow that Gen 2 will be, but it will mean an extended wait for revenue, and it will add greatly to investors risk, as it's another two or three years chipped off already mature patents and gives competitors more time to develop a competing product. All assuming the sensors are adopted at all.

One of the challenges for SWIR is the LED emitters for the light source. Efficiency and cost are still challenging.

Very difficult to envisage a lead-based product being used in a high-volume product especially an Apple device. It was a stretch for me to imagine it might go in something like the AVP, but as that was essentially a low-volume product, and assuming the tech couldn't be achieved any other way, perhaps, but for something that is sold in the 100mn's?

My view is that Gen 1 sensors are most likely dead in the water, if I'm proved wrong then okay, but if I'm correct then the company is unlikely to make any serious cash until 2027 at the earliest. At present spending levels they'll be getting quite low on cash by then, especially if they lose any of the development contracts.

“Have any of you ever worked in engineering design, manufacturing or production engineering.”

I have. You can save the ad hominem rhetoric.

Nothing of the sort. Are Peel Hunt extrapolating too far too?

The company guided they expected the order book to grow from initial low volume order. This is not growth my friend.

Those patent lives are getting shorter and shorter,