Member Info for Nanonano

Loam have been selling down their position for months, so I wouldn't place too much importance on that. They'll be well in profit at present levels.

One longer term holder who has sold and become bearish on the share price prospects, but is just playing his hunch, doesn't know anything more than anyone else. Might be right , might be wrong.

I think that figure comes from day trading. So short term investing. I think the majority of investors on this board are longer term, at least when it comes to Nanoco stock.

I'm not selling.

iphone didn't hit its stride until about the third iteration, and initial concept was scorned by many industry pundits.

"Even at the low end of estimates the Samsung case is worth £200 million so the company must be worth that plus the value of the IP less the cost of the litigation fees now. I’d say that should put current mCap at around 5 times today’s valuation, or approx £250m." Nigwit July 2020

The estimates of $40-50m some are quoting here indicate about 50cents-$1 per display for royalty after deducting costs.

For something that enhances the price of a display by hundreds of dollars, that seems a bit poor don't you think.

If it's Spring I would expect news of a contract with STMicro in the next few weeks e.g. within February.

If it's the WWDC in June, then that contract may not be inked until April or May.

The main risk with sensors IMO, is competitors like Quantum Science coming along and taking a bite out of Nanoco's market before it's had a chance to scale. Naturally that assumes that QS Ltd. have a process which doesn't infringe Nanoco's patents, and trade secrets have not migrated with former Nanoco employees. We shall see.

Seems most posts and retorts are about who is right.

No one here knows exactly how this will pan out. I am reasonably confident of a good settlement, because Nanoco were going to trial with a strong hand, validated patents and a very positive Markman hearing.

The settlement isn't the only iron in the fire. Those who have been following the news with regards to Apple AR will have noticed a significant increase in news for this device, so I believe an announcement from Apple is very likely in the Spring, so I think a contract could drop very shortly, and anything related to Apple, even a modest contract has a significant halo effect. Course investors who've been in this share for a few years have been here before, but this time things are far more public, across multiple suppliers, so I think it will come fruition.

I personally take note of posts on here which are backed by some evidence e.g. a web link

99% of posts are just opinion, and as things stand with the settlement terms, no one outside of a few company insiders will have sufficient information. All we can do is estimate what it might be based on information from Edison, court dockets and the modest information in the RNS's. However it might be an underestimate or an overestimate. I personally have not been at all convinced by the bears on here who seem so sure we've been sold down the river, and in some cases twist statements to suit their own narrative. I trust the present management team, whereas the previous CEO promised too much but delivered too little. Nanoco are in far better shape now than they were say three years ago, where I was hugely concerned for the future of the company.

I'm holding until we get news of this settlement and see some organic growth.

Honestly Nigel, your like a case of the chalfonts.

Of no benefit and a pain in the backside,

"we estimate your future royalties will be X and we discount that by Y percent and you can have the cash today"

So to be determined is what X amount is less whatever Y is, we can only speculate on the final amount.

Six more trading days left to thrash it out.

The Edison statement is there to read in full for anyone, and earnings vs revenue plus fees etc. has already been discussed on here.

You reworded it , so it reads differently.

Must have missed that, Hawi. Lot of posts to scroll through.

I recall someone emailing Edison for clarification on their statement of left over money (if any) from any settlement.

I received no email from Nanoco, personally.

Misquoting the Edison statement again. This what they said.

"For context, we have previously calculated that lost revenue in the US attributable to the patent infringement so far could be US$200–250m or more. This figure would increase if non-US sales and future shipments are included."

I realise it's a one off payment. No confusion there.

But what was the companies lower end expectations as previously guided. When, where?

If it's a just an agreed sum for a license, just say a negotiated sum for whatever amount or a figure still under discussion which the market will be notified of when finalised.

Main source of uncertainty, and what has fueled speculation (alongside major selling by LOAM) is what the company guided to be lower end? Is it the Edison figures, is it the figures listed in court dockets, is it Turner Pope figures, or something else?

"The gross settlement value should be expected to be towards the lower end of the range of expectations for a successful jury trial outcome as previously guided by the Company."

Not quite the same industry i agree, but Qualcomm charge a royalty rate of between 3.5-5% of the device price for licensing their patent's for mobile phone 5G tech.

It's been challenged, and continues to be challenged, but it still holds.

"None of you have even considered Nanoco might lose in front of a jury."

Are you a mind reader too? You should be on the telly.

My own view is that the risk to Nanoco was certainly much higher pre Markman and PTAB hearings and verdict. After those romped home in Nanoco's favour, I considered the risk of losing in court to be very small, but not zero.

Think a few on here have just lost their bottle.

Not low end, lower end. Important to acknowledge the correct language of the RNS to avoid misinterpretation.

“lower end of the range of expectations for a successful jury trial outcome”

The lower end of range was still many dollars per unit by the court dockets, still potentially many hundreds of millions.

" organic contracts are likely to start small and not for many more months at the earliest"

I reckon March or April at the latest for the first one to drop, not that far away.