Member Info for Nanonano

Well one of them at least is reportedly worth tens of millions, and I doubt the other is on his uppers either so I should think a few grand a year is irrelevant.

Damage to reputation by association with a failed company however is far more relevant.

Sorry, a correction I think it was AMS that purchased Osram.

Yep, and also close ties with Osram, who not long ago purchased AMS, another major sensor company, plus of course BMW and Infineon.

Interesting that there was no mention in the RNS that Dieter May is also CEO of Isorg. Certainly looks like a good fit for future partnership with Nanoco.

https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/64761-67#overview

"Is Apple's Vision Pro incorporating Nanoco's quantum dots in the new micro OLED 'organic' displays?"

No.

" one contributor mentioned a while back that one of LOAMS clients was a Canadian pension trust hence LOAM was unable to fully unwind its position."

Speculative. They're simply well-hedged for the remaining holding.

Https://tech.einnews.com/pr_news/676158618/landmark-patent-issued-for-technology-critically-needed-to-combat-chinese-monopoly

LOAM still hold around a 14.5% of shares in the company, around 50% of their largest stake, so they've hardly departed as you put it.

Https://www.patentlyapple.com/2023/12/samsung-unveils-new-isocell-vizion-sensors-to-assist-in-competing-with-apple-vision-pros-eye-tracking-iris-and-gesture-reco.html

Assuming they could, what other companies would they buy, and what would be the benefit?

I think it was BT that floated the notion of suing Samsung with third-party funding. Up until then investors had no idea what had happened with Samsung and regarded any chance of income from them as zero.

Following the collapse of the Apple contract under ME, Nanoco looked on the brink, with no contracts and perhaps a years cash at best, and just a few months before a pandemic hit.

Since then the company has managed to remain solvent, albeit by dilution, and it's got us to the present where they now have enough cash to effect a return to shareholders, and the beginnings of commercialisation, which although modest at present has a lot of potential to grow.

Wasn't rhetoric, I was asking how you think a takeover would be appealing to shareholders. If the company isn't showing serious commercial attraction within the next couple of years, then something has seriously gone wonky with the strategy for organic growth.

The big difference is that the company doesn't have to try and raise cash in the markets for the foreseeable. that enables them to plan strategically. I'm aware they said they had cash to CY2025 back in late 2022, but we've had pretty high inflation, and a later path to commercialisation- I wouldn't mind betting they'd have had to raise cash in the New Year, and that really would have made the company vulnerable, and no on the best terms either.

"I am sticking to my prediction that the business will be subject of a takeover in around 18 to 24 months and probably before its true potential can be realised?"

Under what conditions can you consider that to be an attractive proposition to investors?

It's just a guess. Without confirmation from the company or a third-party analysis, not much else to go on at present.

Potentially another QD enhanced sensor, although again no mention of it in the datasheet. Extended range indicates extended sensitivity.

https://www.hackster.io/news/daylight-is-no-barrier-for-stmicro-s-new-flightsense-vl53l8cx-multi-zone-time-of-flight-sensor-8536d98c8010

That's an InGaAs sensor not QD on CMOS.

A look at the charts from June 2022-January 2023 well tell anyone that you're incorrect. Certainly, there were some swings in the share price, but there was ample opportunity to sell at a profit. Most were holding on a positive outcome in trial, expecting penny shares to turn into pounds.

LOAM and RG were content to take the opportunity of liquidity in an often illiquid stock to bake in gains of three times or more.

If you invested at 37p in the last fund raise, then you had plenty of opportunity to pocket a profit. If you purchased at 70p or close to it, then that was highly speculative based on very marginal detail in that initial RNS.

I held my shares because I believed there are better things to come, but I am aware there are plenty of risks, and it's not a sure thing. The delays in commercialisation are a key indicator of that, and who knows what competitors may have up their sleeves.

If the materials can be traced to Apple products, things may look very different in a few weeks from now.

I think one can see from other investments by RG and LOAM, that they don't always call it right.

If Nanoco were still fighting it out in court, then it would severely constrain them in developing the second generation materials. Perhaps they took a loss in a battle to win a war.