Member Info for NGR1616

have you seen Minority Report?..........imagine a touch screen full sized TV, effectively a Microsoft Surface coffe table on the wall. Touch sensitive is one thing, but also having IR sensing would enhance the experience especially if you weren't actually touching it but using gesture control only.

yes but if you consider displays that also incorporate sensors for IR face recognition or for AR purposes or a 'sub screen' camera built into/onto their existing touch screen panel technology?

Or they could be collaborating on a camera that incorporates film sensing or always open image sensors that use QD's. The 'notch' is something that everyone is trying to phase out in favour of something different as we know with Metalenz.

A multitude of options of course. It's just that IG Chem fits the description and is already in the 'space'.

I'm going for LG Chem.
https://www.lgchem.com/product/PD00000054 for IR sensing in displays / touch screen panels.

Look forward to having some 'color' added to this announcement as the American's would say! Edison will likely issue something soon. The market is not aware of the implications looking at the volumes but it's reassuring to us shareholders. This pushes the cash runway out a little further and is likely another reason why they are being offered additional funds from the major shareholders.

If Lincoln was viable don't you think Spirit might want to have a say about that? Stop making **** up.

It’s actually not as simple as described. A few searches will explain it better. It’s to do with the trade being above or below the midpoint. If for example your trading platform offers a discount on every trade, a buy with a discount can be reported as a sell if the discount drops it below the mid point at the time.

Edison I believe make clear that Nanoco commissions the reports in their statements. So on that basis they are a paid mouthpiece and for a reason. It's another medium to expand on RNS's and they always as often as not follow up with a release shortly after an RNS. I have no issue with that and prefer that to leaving the RNS as the only conduit.

I suspect non-dilutive financing will be contingent on being repaid with some portion of any award but hopefully limited to the value of the finance and not disproportionate.

I think this is great news for those who bought in low but it's of little benefit to those who've already lost significant sums of money. Many of the physical realities are unchanged despite the corporate actions they can't lower the OWC and I can't see how money can be found to drill more wells. It's quite possible the board will continue with their previous stated strategy to wind down. Sorry that's my opinion.

I don't know but you can increase the value of damages with each year that passes.

Conversely I added more at 21.8472p earlier. Now sitting on 300k.

Cavendish I ticked you up for that witty response! Good luck to all moving forwards. In other news; I just got sacked from my deramping job :-)

The BoD will announce this shortly

"The PTAB works to a regulated timeframe and hence a decision on the IPRs is expected no later than May 2022" from the RNS

it is relevant yes. It's also important that people understand that some posters on here are unable to properly interpret even the clearest of RNS messages and shouldn't be trusted for their opinions at all.

I think there's definitely scope for some trading here if people are brave enough and time it correctly but the risks are massive and the fundamentals are unchanged. Oil price is clearly an assist but I'd be more focused on the actual production from the only 2 development wells. 7 is dead. If 6 continues to water out and/or decline then the game is up.

maybe because the licences surrounding HUR might have some potential but until drilled they won't know. But the region has conventional oil plays and the licences Shell and BP were awarded are not fractured basement. Obviously.

how much allocated for deco?

maqsood7....."New cpr" Which company would take this on now and do a CPR that argued the water being produced from 6 and 7 is from an incorrect OWC assumption and in fact it is much deeper? Only a company hellbent on destroying its reputation. The RPS CPR was based on available data at the time and it was interpreted as per industry practices. That doesn't mean it was right, or wrong. The key now is ongoing production from the Early Production System of which the sole purpose was to test the reservoir characteristics. They have and the results are a much shallower OWC and a reciprocal downgrade in reserves and forward production estimates. Changing the BoD doesn't alter these facts and HUR can't drill any new wells to access any other parts of the reservoir without the restructure or it will instead be wound down. An awful outcome, but them's the realities.

I am reminded that Samsungs defence is weak and the evidence is robust. There are material implications for both companies in relation to the tech. One has profited handsomely from it and maintained a price differential against the competition as a result of their exclusivities which are from the company that invented the technology yet whom has not so far benefited. I doubt very much the court will see it any other way. All that is in question is to what extent and to what value? I also remain convinced that should the judgments go our way it will be in tandem with a license agreement and the value of the company will be at least $1bn. That's aside from any ST Micro revenue. In time this share could be multiples there of.