Member Info for NGR1616

He was drunk at a bank holiday party and didn’t realise he was being interviewed. That’s the only logical explanation for that awful article.

“ Even if the jury has to be objective. Nobody can suppress emotions.”. Just hope none of them has a Samsung TV at home.

I’m sure sufficiency was tested by both the Mintz team and the funders who are likely also from a legal background.

No one will be liable for incompetence as much as we’d like that to be the case.

Not quite the slam dunk Samsung will settle situation we all hope for, however I don’t see how BT can publicly state their confidence in the case has increased without the matters being noted prior. Mintz are in this all day everyday and would be advising Nanoco how the case was proceeding. Nothing is certain, I don’t believe for one second that Samsung won’t be defending themselves at trial but it comes down to trust to a certain degree. Tenner has little to gain with mis direction in this regard, but plenty to lose. I’ll be watching events closely of course but even if this is a loss in court we also have the right of appeal and one would hope that the organic business case is robust and frankly that’s what I’d prefer over this win in absence of revenue.

nope there it is

Was it my imagination or was the LOAM thread removed?

RJT agree. The opportunities for the SP to rise materially pre court case have diminished which leaves only the risk of losing in court. Both LOAM and RG are taking profits well earned and may buy them back post trial.

Turcan is a non exec director of LOAM and a representative of Lombard Odier Investment Management one of the groups largest shareholders so his name is applied as a person closely associated in these transactions. The LOIM fund is clearly de-risking, as you'd expect of any well managed fund you trust with your money, prior to the trial and it looks like LOAM. The reality is LOAM might not be invested as a single entity but by several investment funds within. So in other words Turcan is a fund manager who's name has been used in the transactions.

I’m sticking with the “we’re going to trial” narrative from the company and believe Samsung want to defend themselves in court. Reputationally [sic] this might actually be better for them than a settlement and even if found liable they can appeal and if the appeal is unsuccessful they can still defend themselves in public by accepting the court decision (s) yet claim publicly that they believe they did nothing wrong. No one will believe them but it will be lost in the noise.

A settlement on the other hand is an admission of liability and reputationally that’s harder to defend.

The only caveat I’ll make is a negotiated settlement that includes a narrative that protects their reputation along the lines of a forward collaborative relationship with Nanoco is an outside chance but I rate that at <5%. Of course that’s why they are being sued in the first place.

Troublesome I agree some might see it that way but similarly international litigation was flagged by BT in March as something they were considering so it’s perhaps more a function of mediation ending and pre trial and the timing is about getting the filing in place amongst the workload from the US trial plus they had to approve funding from the source of funds.

Should be a raft of similar filings in the coming days and weeks in order of sales volume and court systems so the only delay will be preparing and filing the paperwork
"The group is actively reviewing options for similar litigation in other territories....."

Isn’t it time we all just focus on the important positive developments? Should be some good coverage tomorrow. Be good if Bloomberg and Reuters pick it up.

BBD if memory serves he compared the fascist behaviours of a herd of people with confirmation bias tendencies who were trying to control the narrative to the regime in 1930’s Germany. The herd complained knowing the subject matter would be of interest to the moderators to get him banned. They succeeded and NigWits point was borne out in reality and the herd still didn’t get it. Irony can come thick and fast sometimes.

Steak - I’m not expecting a settlement pre trial. I’d be delighted if the was one though.

Furthermore let’s simply discuss this new development on its own merits.

Twice of late we’ve had an RNS that night grab the attention of someone not invested to start looking at Nanoco. Part of that might be looking in here. And on both occasions they’ll be witness to a bunch of grown adults (presumably) behaving as if they were in the playground. I’d be out off, as I am now, if ever looking in here again. Can we please understand we have different views and respect that. No one is doing themselves a favour just now and I know it’s easy to get sucked in, just please try not to fall in the trap.

Should we sue in other regions in the interim?

it's funny how ramping is ok, but trying to regain balance ("deramping") is not ok. Why is that? De-ramping is a mis-used terminology when used in the face of bullish confirmation bias. People with high hopes and expectations simply don't like others pouring water on the fire. At no point has anyone posted on these boards lately suggesting that Nanoco can't or won't win or that the case is weak or that Samsung are innocent which would be more akin to undermining the investment case. Instead some have added caution to the expectation and I hope people can understand the reasons for that.

Looking a little more settled today. I think the recent news from the courts and the RNS activity has certainly influenced small private investment decisions. Many of us have long term views (weighted by risk) and others are perhaps more short term. I think that variety were responsible for the speculative rise on hearing about the court decisions on MMC thinking a settlement was in the off-ing and subsequent RNS advising we’re going to trial prompted some to sell. What I’m clear about is the rise was overbought and I’m glad to see some of the steam taken out as we await the next developments.

And just how am I supposed to prove it one way or another? I could I suppose take a screenshot and create a url link but I frankly can’t be bothered.

So do you think I’m lying? Do you think I’m here at 11pm working nefariously on behalf of some clandestine group attempting a whole sale manipulation of Nanoco? Because that’s what you seem to be suggesting and that a fantasy that leads me to think you are mentally unstable.