Member Info for NGR1616

I guess they moved the goalposts on the wafer size too.

Unless you think they are not going to pay out, what's the issue with a change in guidance because they used the word "shortly" in a previous RNS? It's nit picking.

Lee7 it depends on the target market. A larger wafer opens up mope opportunity.

Gino that's my thought in part as well. It's more a hope than an expectation as the delay could simply be down to thorough due diligence now they have the funds in the bank. As I suggested perhaps they waited for Dieter and he suggested a robust review prior to announcing with a fresh set of tax lawyers and accountants. Whatever they propose is going to be under scrutiny and I'm sure they want to avoid any mistakes.

They probably felt they were under pressure from the activist PI's to give you the update that nothing has changed to sate everyone's impatience.

Agree with Daz - Q1 is guided. Outside of that then there is a valid reason to be updated as to why now. Until then, they are obligated to return the capital so unless you think otherwise we shall all just have to sit on our hands for up to 7 more weeks.

Wafer size has increased from 200mm to 300mm.

Troublesome I didn’t start this crap no matter what you think. But on the topic of thinking I consider you to be particularly annoying.

Kooba I am responding to the ‘letter’ this morning that once more dragged the management team through the mud and whilst you say I have no knowledge of information parties were dealing on it seems quite acceptable to let others suggest they did.

I’m frankly sick of post blaming others for a decision they made to remain invested on a fairly binary outcome.

I’d just prefer people were more like TG2D who has at least had the good grace to accept it and move on for this griping is not doing anyone any favours.

I’m fairly confident that if the new NEDS give glowing reports about the existing board they won’t be believed by the majority; sorry the minority of detractors on here! Maybe they’ll bring back Eddleman 🤣

The more I look back the more convinced I am that a win in court even if it were for $500m would have been a more disruptive outcome than having settled when we did for what we got. Those who disagree will be the same ones looking for a quick buck and artificially inflated the SP before the details were announced (Pi’s and TH included. LOAM sold 12.5m shares at between 72p and 55.8p as if it were a crime for an asset management company to make a profit when presented with an opportunity. RG had sold to below the required level well in advance and is tarred with the same brush. These are professional inventors not gamblers like some on here would appear to be.

You may think a NED might not want to rock the boat but they certainly won’t want it to capsize as they will be legally responsible of the reason the company went under was due to the BoD.

Troublesome if you read the link posted by Idontmessabout I think you'll find your 'off the cuff' comment is likely on point.

I agree with Carlos - you are speaking for yourself and in reality the very small minority in this echo chamber!

The board has survived two votes by large margins and if their competence and integrity was in any doubt at all I very much doubt either NED would be joining without first making clear that they want change.

However that doesn’t mean as the company grows as we hope that a new leadership team won’t be required. But it won’t be because Maxi has lost confidence because the settlement didn’t marry up with figures bandied around for a successful win in court.

Remember BT said his position was always a negotiated settlement that represents fair value. It was never in a million years going to be close to the potential maximum court win value, assuming we won and assuming the award reflected the upper range. There was a large downside if litigation failed (not my words)

Samsung were working with Nanoco as we know and initial discussions stretch back to 2006/7. An agreement was signed in 2012/13 to work together but that was cancelled and the rest is history.

What we don’t know is what Samsung developed themselves and what evidence of said developments they have and how that might have been defended in court or what was presented in negotiation.

You can continue to believe it would be worth rolling the dice for a win and subsequent protracted appeals lasting for years with the stress that would put on the companies financial footing or….accept the outcome was pragmatic and predictable. I already know your answer and everyone else’s so save yourself the bother of responding.

Why don’t you patronise him some more and tell him to remember to brush his teeth in the morning and wear matching socks before you advise him on his responsibilities Maxi?

I'm at a loss for words.....

The voting suggests otherwise.

Iris recognition is listed on page 6 of the 2023 results presentation for those interested under ‘sensing market opportunities’

Nanoco is a business that’s been around for sometime. As Kooba points out we waited a long time for the Samsung outcome so what’s a few more weeks?

In context we’re not sky news reporting on King Charles are we!

I can say with a degree of confidence that no matter what the communications said, the same suspects would be scrutinising it ---e.g. "in due course" WTF does that mean?

Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Maxi - shortly could mean many things as has already been hinted at. I'm pretty relaxed about the whole thing yet expect an RNS to arrive tomorrow or the day after but if it doesn't I'm not panicking nor am I questioning the board in the manner some are already.

Personally given the previous scrutiny the board were subjected to, I'd expect them to take up any advice from Dieter May which may include the proposal under go another round of DD for legal and tax implications to make sure whatever is proposed meets all of the regulatory and financial requirements whilst delivering the objective to the shareholders as fairly as possible - I think one whiff of II's disproportionately benefitting would be a very poor from a PI perspective.

So we may have to wait a few weeks yet.

As for the mechanism I believe it will be through share cancellations and share repurchases.

Tomorrow is the day for sure. Or maybe the day after. Who knows.

But there’s a palpable difference between holders expectations - which is very interesting when you look back on previous behaviours and perhaps simply all that’s needed is to look at the root of the matter.

Some desperate folks on here exhibiting behaviours I’ve seen before……

Maybe tomorrow you’ll get the RNS to chew on Kooba.