Member Info for NGR1616

I think you’ll be in for a disappointment at the call, 17 days have elapsed since the letter was issued, 10 days past the deadline so I suspect this is effectively a legal matter now and therefore might be referenced but unlikely to be covered in detail in case of prejudice.

Zzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Muppet

I believe LOAM do but have decided to not tell anyone………ffs.

Samsung are not a charity supporting British PI’s

Small minded approach wishing ill on others.

As for the rest I don’t believe any company would do a raise for less than they thought they could get away with.

Then there’s simple negotiating tactics. As I’ve said many times before you don’t tell the other party what you’d accept until it comes to accepting it.

Clearly there are many schools of thought being discussed and despite my sometimes colourful language I respect people are entitled to their opinions even if I don’t agree with them.

Maybe one day we can look back and be satisfied with the outcomes, but clearly we’re not at that point yet. And might never be.

You absolutely cannot say that with 100% certainty HH. You might believe it but there’s absolutely no guarantee especially with a jury.

Until there’s a PO there’s risk. I’m confident in what the BoD is telling us and that’s where we disagree.

Suppose we’d gone to court what figure do you ‘think’ we’d have ‘won’? And when do you ‘think’ we’d be actually in receipt of that money? Over what timescale and at what legal cost?

Assuming there’s no confirmed revenue during the intervening period what would happen if we needed another raise? Plus interest on loans. Plus the IP not fully validated.

Assuming we won.

Versus a cash settlement now.

But one last request: Stop being an anarchist for Tenner and the board.

LOAM selling was the red flag ?? that indicated they understood the RNS. They knew and ‘we’ didn't.

They sold for profit yet sold most sold here it seems at the bottom but somehow ‘we’ were right and they are wrong and BT should resign right?

LOAM are now buying so by this logic everyone should sell forthwith whatever they still hold.

I’m buying this morning for info. I’ll follow the clever people.

Same as I’m not listening to your bitterness over a misinterpretation of events HH

Not agreeing with Henry either ;-)

Henry. With your myopic view I’m assuming it’s modern history you’re interested in?

Correct. I’m not frustrated. I remain trusting of the board.

Henry, apologies for the tone. As frustrated you are about the deal, I am at some posters reaction to it.

Failure to appreciate what was happening in taking negotiating positions, missing the messages in the RNS about low end expectations and not valuing the outcome correctly because of hype isn’t BT’s fault. It lies solely at the feet of the investor.

Hey at least I was polite!

The Sales guy must have a performance geared incentive scheme. Fraudulent reporting of revenue for short term gain, longer term imprisonment.

Further reading
https://www.glscap.com/iam-covers-gls-capital-involvement-in-nanoco-technologies-150m-samsung-settlement/

FH " It would be stupid to pursue this now."

So the CEO tells us they are but some muppet keyboard warrior thinks otherwise!

Next you'll be telling us you think the whole IP portfolio related to display is worthless! ....oh what you just did.

They sold 2 patents. That's all.

"rather than chasing companies for scraps"

10% of $150m is $15m and represents 16% of the Net Samsung award.

Nanoco could conceivably increase the margins in any licence discussion. CAGR is high. Why you'd not chase this "scrap" is beyond me.