Member Info for Nanonano

I would expect any suspension of a BB to be accompanied by an RNS. However, I think any suspension is highly unlikely.

I think the company is sensible to retain a standard timeline for something that is still in development. If they can deliver sooner then all to the good, however if they give an earlier delivery and then fail that deadline they end up with a roasting from the market and investors.

Regarding the development times, I must admit I was surprised when they said around the five year mark, as the Apple contract was supposedly getting close to production after little more than 18 months or so. BT did say that the development can be accelerated if the companies involved are willing to chuck a bit more cash in.

"Oooh la la - and commercially available :"

VGA resolution, requires cooling by the looks of the spec. Ingaas most likely- so expensive?

SWIR sensors have been around for a while, just not consumer facing.

In fairness I think the management team have been pretty good in their presentations explaining what the various terms mean and how the QD technology provides an advantage over current technology. If you're still all at sea with the technobabble, then a google search will generally provide further guidance on NIR and SWIR, and if you're still clueless after that perhaps wise to consider another area to invest in.

Beyond Samsung I think the major OEM players in the QD display space are TCL, Hisense and to a lesser extent LG. AFAIK the Chinese are still using cadmium, or cad light which is good enough to bypass any regulation (at present) and so far there doesn't seem to be any signs of a shift away from that.

I understood Sharp are exiting display.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/Foxconn-s-Sharp-pivots-to-AI-after-decision-to-exit-TV-display-production

In recent conference calls, BT has said they're not looking to challenge QD makers, but instead challenge the OEM's and only once they've built a significant market, which could take years.

To me that sounds like they're hoping the OEM's will simply switch supply to Nanoco to avoid future litigation, but can't say I've seen any evidence of that to date.

All this talk of throwing the management team out seems a bit pointless, bearing in mind there have been two golden opportunities to show them the door, I think it was only about a third of the shares in issue that placed votes at all. at the EGM and AGM.

Consequently, I find it hard to imagine the team are concerned about their jobs unless the II's muscle in.

The company has cash to last the next few years. One silver lining is the new non exec's who do have extensive experience in the target industries Nanoco is working in, so if they can't kick open a few doors, I'm not sure who can.

Well I don’t recall the company ever being valued this low even in the darkest times of 2019/2020. With the shares in issue and, cash plus value of assets, the rest of the company is being valued at a few million at best.

So whatever your opinion of the management team, it’s not a grand boast is it?

The majority of investors don't bother to vote going by the number of votes received. I suspect a lot of PI's only hold a few hundred shares as part of a portfolio in numerous companies. It's only investors with a fair amount of skin in the game that are likely to closely track progress of the company.

It will be interesting to see how many votes are submitted at the next AGM, bearing in mind LOAM and other II's have now significantly lowered their stake in the company.

Ad hominem discussion amongst board members will achieve nothing beyond distraction, and I regularly see this on both sides.

Regardless of the reasons for the lack of detail around the commercial business, it still doesn't do anything for the markets view of the company prospects.

The Samsung settlement is a fixed amount- there'll be no more cash coming from them regarding display, and so far they look to be the only player of any significance in the cadmium-free space.

Meanwhile all the other OEM's, who Michael Edelman once stated 'All want our dots' a few years back seem content to use cadmium based technology, and it looks like Shoei have the scale to supply, with a 12 ton brewing keg.

No idea, but not something I have any concern about.

Nanoco had a CEO with a scientific background, but he didn’t get those contracts over the line, and he didn’t manage the finances well either- blew through million in just a few years, and the company was almost bankrupted when he departed.

I do think the lack of information regarding the commercial materials sales is a problem. If we look at a company like Metalenz they talk about who they’re working with and the items they’re working on, and that’s prior to them coming on the market. Why are they able to talk about these things, yet Nanoco are telling us they must keep quiet?

I've heard that one before.

Forecasts are one thing, realisation quite another. The QD's are a very small part of the supply chain, but I'm not seeing much enthusiasm for pivoting away from cadmium-based QD tech.

Https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/msid.1483

https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/msid.1484

https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/msid.1485

https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/msid.1486

https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/msid.1487

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8tY-0MW2Ls

I'm pretty sure that in the US, publicly traded companies aren't permitted to be so secretive about their business, especially when a contract is their sole source of income.

BT did define fair value as multiples of company value, more than once too. That's not what was achieved.

The company has plenty of past form of its reach exceeding its grasp sadly.

That aside it doesn't excuse the secrecy surrounding the commercial sales, and since when has the so called quantities been for development?

As for the market opportunity, it all depends. the opportunity for display was pitched at £100m's, half or more of the display market etc. etc. The reality was around 6% of the display market, and only one significant player cad-free who then ripped off Nanoco.