Member Info for Nanonano

"1st stage of qd film for display is already entering the later faze commercially, starting to see discounts from the main players and competitors undercutting. "

I believe that QD enhanced LCD will be with us for years to come. For most people who don't want to pay thousands for a TV, the quality is more than adequate, and the tech is mature and well proven- manufacturers can squirt them out like sausages.

All the LCD fab takes place in China though, so the Koreans are focusing on OLED and microLED to maintain their share of the premium market. It looks rather like the approach the Japanese took when the Korean OEM's started to seriously enter the market, e.g. who seriously looked at a Samsung or LG tv back in the 90's?

"I’ll reserve judgement until BT is questioned and shares his and Nanoco’s story."

I expect the next interims Q & A to be lively, assuming they allow them. In ME's day they only took questions from ii's, analysts and brokers, pi's didn't get a look in.

I can predict what will be said though if questioned on the chasm between the final settlement and predictions by Edison, Tuner Pope etc..

"Those estimates were not Nanoco's. Our estimates were commercially sensitive etc."

Well patents don't last forever, and the company have lost a lot of staff to competitors.

I ask I myself how exclusive the IRQD materials are to Nanoco, and also how effective they are at protecting their trade secrets. They got taken to the cleaners by Samsung.

QS Ltd are considered a very small outfit, but they seem to be growing fast, and their headcount almost matches Nanoco. Three of their most senior staff are ex-Nanoco, why did they leave and what knowledge has transferred with them?

What will be the value of Nanoco's other patents when the molecular seeding patent expires in a couple of years, which coincidently aligns with when SWIR CMOS is supposed to heavily scale.

To the present Nanoco has been a momentum trap for investors with relatively short periods of gain, which are often sold into by ii's with large holdings taking the price quickly down, then followed by disappointing news which depresses the share price further usually putting pi's into the red, met by howls of despair on the message boards.

I think anyone would have be extremely naive to believe that major holders were blissfully unaware of what Nanoco were really looking to receive on a settlement. However fat chance of proving it.

Until the calamitous fall in share price in 2019 and 2020, there was very little opportunity for any pi to seriously average down, and then any investor buying was taking a very high risk, as no one without inside information was aware of what had happened with Samsung and there appeared to be no other business on the horizon and not much cash left from fund raises.

The main issue with the low value of deal from Samsung is that it places a serious question mark over the value of Nanoco's technology going forward, and that history will repeat itself with sensor materials.

“ The UK Gov wants to drive production in the UK of high-end tech, as such scaling the production of Quantum Dot displays and tech is good potential.”

Some hopes. This government are only interested in looking after their city banker friends.

I’m baffled how wassname-wit got a claimed 62p for his shares if he sold after the second RNS.

Nanoco are fond of throwing out the big figures e.g. the Runcorn facility is capable of making £100m of materials a year if run 24-7. So okay great, how much do you expect to sell in the next 24 months, “we don’t know”, how much does it cost for a gram of heatwave dots “that’s commercially sensitive information”.

The only information we have regarding potential revenue generation is it should, at a minimum, get the company to a break even proposition. So potentially £4-5m upwards.

However still waiting for that contract, and QS ltd are just down the road and look hungry.

“If they had 6 products by 2025 all maximising the use of the Runcorn facility they could earn say £60M a year and the share price would be around 74p.”

Big IF.

I think the first use is very likely to be Apples imminent AR/VR reality pro headset. It seems to fit with the schedule, and with the technical requirements. The unit is reported to cost around $3000, and that is sold at cost, so it’s not expected to fly off the shelves, so niche market to begin with. A cheaper headset is in the offing for 2024, but is still expected to cost around $1500. AR/VR is still a new tech, so difficult to predict how Apples unit will be received.

The larger market is smart phones, tablets etc. however unlikely to realised until 2025 at the earliest.

That should say “some are speculating.”

The use for the infra red sensors has not been disclosed. A9me are speculating. A published roadmap for production has been given by the European customer, but Nanoco have not yet given any disclosure of a contract for production. So still waiting.

“On track to deliver two fully validated production materials for use in infra-red sensing.”

This is for the European customer, believed to be STMicro. Other sensor contracts pending with five other companies, no idea who they are, one is a top ten Asian chemicals manufacturer supplying to the semiconductor industry. Apart from STMicro, none of the other companies are likely to scale before 2025 at the earliest.

I could understand the company being nervous about funding legal action if they were paying for it, but with a major specialist third party funder the costs were met by them.

For Nanoco to remain a going concern beyond 2025 requires organic growth, which they have expressed great confidence in within this calendar year.

Perhaps they're not quite as confident in their organic growth prospects as they would like investors to believe.

Not wise to assume any commercial contract with this company, especially in an area of the business which has been wound down.

Most if not all of the staff involved with the biological/medical uses of the QD's have moved on.

I wouldn't pin any hopes on a takeover, personally.

The medical side of the business seems to have been sidelined, even the Covid 19 test never went anywhere.

It's the sensor materials or bust for this company. All other revenue streams are either dead or have been taken over already.

Very disappointing outcome after several years invested here.

"The company cannot simply just announce that it has beaten its own lowly expectations / guidance when it kept that private. "

They would simply say that is company confidential. Seems the way most of these small companies operate. The executives want to maintain maximum investor confidence to maintain a reasonable company valuation, else it compromises the ability to raise cash if required and of course puts their own positions in jeopardy.

I would also bear in mind that the language of the RNS is such that the $90m retained may not be fully realised. It's an expectation, but not a certainty.

Display won't bring in a button for Nanoco from now on, Samsung have it sewn up. They won't have purchased those patents without good reason, Samsung are crooked but not fools. The value of Nanoco was in its patents and IP, and that has now been sold for a song.

Nanoco could potentially litigate against others, question is how much it could cost and is it worth doing so?

The bar has been set very low after the accepted offer from Samsung.

The problem is Nanoco have no ongoing income source. Sensor materials are a potential lucrative income stream, but there are competitors, QS Ltd have three ex nano employees including two senior scientists, and Merck have partnered with them having ended their agreement with Nanoco. Their global business developer was linked with Sony.

Well they've been accurate in predicting a deal transformative to shareholders. Just not transformative in the way they hoped.

Not as bad as some predicted, not as good as many of us were hoping.

I think QD's in display is now owned by Samsung, other companies may come and kick the tyres at Nanoco, but I'll be amazed if they receive any business in that area.

So, the litigation was described as the cherry on the cake, that cherry turned out to be smaller than hope for, now we wait to see what the cake is like.