Member Info for NGR1616

I don’t know! Ask BT why he thinks there was material ordered for that many sensors. I’m pretty sure someone knows what they are doing. As for the kits the information is out there in presentations linked recently by Steckel.

The ‘device’ you speak of is a photodiode sensor array Nanonano. Be better referred to as the sensor or product I think and the device being where the sensor ends up.

STM have already said they have supplied evaluation kits and the ORM’s have to figure out what to do with the new sensor and its capabilities and that could take years. I don’t see how you can expect them to announce the end devices until an OEM actually orders them, incorporates them and sells the end device.

Nanoco they would i guess make more than one wafer for the initial run. Nanoco only said they supplied enough material to make a ‘few’ million devices not that a few million devices were being made.

I am aware of these matters but thanks for bringing them to my attention again and it does concern me. I have considered the what if's of waking up one day to news like STM has ended the supply agreement because the tech is dud. I've questioned whether BT is another CEO if a small cap co on the take living it up at our expense.

I can't speak for the reasons that individuals or II's sold when they did. I could offer many suggestions but we'll never know precisely why, at least not just now.

Like you I have a chunk invested here and my pension would take a big hit if it fails. I personally don't believe the griping towards the company and the CEO is merited. Especially if you are invested. I believe there's an argument he misled during the settlement but if he did I don't believe it was a calculated act, only one with the objective of obtaining a good settlement and $150m seems pretty decent to me. Everything else he has delivered on as far as I can see, sometimes closer to timelines than we might want but delivered none the less. I believe he should be measured on that and not on the complex situation surrounding the settlement with one of the worlds largest, well funded and not exactly highly principled companies.

Am I taking the small co CEO's word for it anymore than you? If you said you were not invested that statement would have more credence.

Kooba let's be clear, my PR isn't cheap, it's free (apart from the retainer BT sends monthly)

TG2D is portraying the case that Nanoco has achieved nothing in 20 years. I have listed some of their achievements which are not insignificant.

However I agree with Nanonano - to be considered a successful co they will need repeating revenue and to be profitable. I've said that before.

The guidance is to achieve that in the next FY and beyond potentially that will grow further. They only just had their product validated. STM are only just launching the sensor containing the validated product. STM are of the view that the OEM/device companies need to understand what they can do with a NIR/SWIR sensor before they can integrate it and this could take another 12-48 months for wide adoption. So why the impatience? You have a clear eye for detail. I know you understand what I'm saying for I'm just quoting STM themselves, so I can only conclude you are being deliberate in this regard.

Kooba is there anything that I've written that's not in the public domain? What do you expect me to do, make stuff up about the company?

Troublesome - come up with something original and I'll give you credit. Searching the internet looking for mental disorders to attribute to me is a waste of your time. You are going on block again because I can't handle the cruelty.

Just in case you missed it first time I think it's important that people see the positives TG2D and not the fantasy narrative you peddle. TG2D wrote "never challenging on their lack of delivery in creating share holder value in over 20 years by holding the CEO and Board to account is yet another 'tell tell' sign!"

The past 20 years......

Nigel Pickett created the company spun out from Manchester University. The leadership team then were on the cusp of supply large volumes of QD's to revolutionise display only for the IP to be stolen. theyir technology did lead to the manufacture of large volumes of CFQD's

Brian Tenner secured litigation funding and sued Samsung resulting in a $150m settlement that validated the IP.

Display revenues are still possible as QD display sees significant growth potential from other OEM's

The company returned £30m to shareholders and has put it on a sound financial footing with retained funds so they can focus on R&D and the good decision to develop the Fab to accelerate the product development cycle.

The company continues to develop new materials and has opened up a new route to new market in sensing.

They have a JDA and supply agreement with one of the largest semiconductor companies in the world and if adopted their products could be as ubiquitous as standard RGB sensors and the market is massive and goes beyond mobile devices where the first NIR/SWIR sensor has been designed for.

They have another development agreement with another chemical customer with a third due in the next few months.

They are aiming to achieve Break Even in FY25. Adoption in a high volume product such as a mobile could deliver significant revenue as early as 2026

They are developing higher performance tunable Gen 2 lead free materials that can be used in a variety of applications such as biometrics, LIDAR, Automotive, even safer eye tracking.

So have they delivered in the past 20 years? I believe so and they have earned the right to be proud of their achievements.

OMG sack the lot of them for using positive words! It's like being in Kindergarten at times with you.

And Troublesome my special friend, since you keep goading me I'll take the bait....with you it's more like being in an an old folks home. You just ain't got it anymore dude.

I'm sure the more sensible contributors amongst us can understand the journey in the way children and the senile cant.

TG2D "In addition someone claiming to be a LTH yet never holding the Board to account, always to their defence, regardless of their actions, and never challenging them on their lack of delivery in creating share holder value in over 20 years by holding the CEO and Board to account is yet another 'tell tell' sign!"

Firstly I am a LTH and it's not so much that I defend the board, it's that I don't have the same issues with them that you have. Is that so hard to understand?

So how and for what should I be challenging 'them' for the past 20 years?

Should I challenge NP for creating the company? What about ME and the previous leadership team for building the company to the point they were going to be revolutionising display only for the IP to be stolen?

Should I be challenging BT for securing litigation funding and suing Samsung and securing a $150m settlement and validating our IP so that we may yet get display revenue as QD sees significant growth potential from other OEM's?

Or for them returning £30-33m to shareholders and leaving the company fully funded for years to come so they can focus on R&D and development of the fab?

Or for NP and BT for developing new materials and opening up new market opportunities and signing a supply agreement with one of the largest semiconductor companies in the world where once adopted their products could be as ubiquitous and standard RGB sensors?

How about because they wear T-shirts and try to improve their PR as you and others have clamoured for in the past or for creating a positive work force for young people or maybe for their claim to be a market leader in novel nanomaterials just like other companies do and you complain that Nanoco doesn't make the same 'noise'

Feel free to challenge these points, but the fact is you are just grinding an axe and the company has done nothing wrong save for some missteps in communications during a complex legal case where what is said is scrutinised and interpreted differently depending on perspective. If you can't get over that then I'd question why if at all you are still invested.

tg2d you have a fascination bordering on obsession with me and nig/terrorwit - it’s a bit weird but good luck with it. i’m not going to engage with you unless it’s about the company on a technical basis or further corporate matters. any personal stuff will get ignored because i’ve got no interest in engaging with you or others on that level. it’s boring, serves no purpose and as anonymous grown men hiding behind a keyboard it’s clear after years of the same *******s that minds can’t be changed. i have an opinion of you and others that likely matches your and their opinion of me (i’ll keep it to myself ) and no matter what happens in future it’s unlikely you’ll change. some people can but others simply can’t because that’s their nature.

so fill your boots but im not buying. this board serves little purpose when you and your like are dragging it down. hopefully we can get back to discussing what actually matters. wishful thinking.

i’ve been gardening. lovely evening. everything is thriving in the heat and longest day sunlight.

disappointed to see the posts but i’m not surprised given our new contributors arrival !

i’m not entering the fray. can’t be ****d. life is too short.

Is it really though Kooba? Makes sense to me most of it. Do you think you might be a teensy weensy bit prejudiced?

Is that the same independent media who reported the settlement could be $500m Nanonano?

Steckel said that it could take 2-5 years for OEM's to understand what to do with a SWIR sensor. They have been given kits to evaluate their capabilities but there has to be a use for it. Facial ID/security for mobiles and eye scanning for headsets seem to be the obvious choices and whatever chip STM are making, they acknowledge it was designed and manufactured for use in mobiles.

Whatever, this is going to take time. Some accept this already others I don't believe appreciate the development cycle and subsequent adoption cycle and I don't mean that to sound condescending even though many will take it that way and some will just refuse to accept new ideas especially coming from someone they hold in such low esteem. But in my view that's the reality that it will take years but one day the tech will be ubiquitous and replace standard RGB sensors. Whilst we wait, naysayers will fill the void through lack of understanding or because they cant help themselves, or perhaps they are trying to drive a lower entry price. It matter not to me who is invested for the long term.

I'm not sure what you are referring to in relation to QD's that I posted that could be considered inaccurate. Do you mind elaborating?

I agree. But there is no evidence of any other sensor in STM's portfolio that I can find. I very much doubt they are producing a sensor in secret but I suppose it's possible.

Nanonano can you point to a sensor in STM's product selector that matches what we think might be using QD film in a photodiode array that is in volume production and listed with a status of 'ACTIVE'? The answer is you won't.

What you will find is VD55G1 which has many of the attributes STM have presented on before but doesn't explicitly mention QD but would need QD to achieve the stated performance as I understand it. It is listed with a status of 'EVALUATION'

So whilst you are suggesting there is no evidence for my peddling that the sensor is out for "sampling" there is also no evidence for anything else unless you can point me to it?

By the way TW, STM have over 200.000 customers not 2 thousand.

Hello Terrorwit. Have to say I did laugh when I spotted you popping up here. All quiet over on ADVFN is it?

TG2D is twisting the narrative somewhat but in some respects he's correct. Nanoco currently has no revenue of note, no expectation that will change in the near term and there's no hype. Quite how much of that is down to the antics on here or the actions of II's is unquantifiable.

The question is not just, do you trust the board to deliver, but also do you believe in the technology? Thus far BT has improved Nanoco's position after securing a substantial settlement from Samsung and the JD with STM I'm hopeful will bear fruit. I'm not convinced a change of board or CEO to would make any difference especially if it meant we'd effectively be an IP shell now. There is rotten fruit on here that still have issue with the $150m settlement and have n patience. I just hope that overtime they are convinced otherwise...if they can wait.

TG2D you know fine well he didn't say anything of the sort. You are creating a false narrative and diversion.

TG2D can you point to the time index and article of the lie you perpetuate that BT is "not interested in the final product or the consumer market" If you can find that exact quote I'll take a listen, but my recollection is he said something different.

Thanks