Member Info for NGR1616

No……unless they own the IP on them which is extremely unlikely.

I expect the self financing comments in 2025 to reflect something other than just Vision Pro but I'm happy to be surprised on an earlier date assuming uptake is greater than predicted and the supply chain can satisfy demand.

What was said was "In a nutshell if all the IR sensors in the device use QD's then around £1-2 profit to Nanoco for every Vision Pro sold. £10 per device would be pure fantasy IMO"

for 13 sensors per device that works out at a profit per sensor of 8p to 15p per sensor.

Across the Vision supply chain I expect there to be economies to be found. But I don't think Nanoco will be under much pressure to lower prices. STM and Nanoco could hold Apple to ransom since the SWIR sensor is a USP in my opinion. They wont though because that would be business suicide. But I do expect Nanoco to increase prices if they are tasked with improving supply and/or quality and they could simply blame inflation , raw material costs etc or it.

I believe Nanoco can leverage the price upwards once the need for CQD’s becomes critical to the device’s viability.

That's not what I meant no. You suggested TG2D's £10 per device was fanciful which I agreed with and suggested 1/10th of that which aligns with your estimate of £1-2 or 10p-20p per sensor.

If the sensor is so cheap does what’s the benefit of having less? The screen will be changed as will the processor but I think the sensors will still be required.

It’s not possible in the short or medium term if at all. By the time manufacturing capacity increases the demand will have been replaced by another device- the cheaper consumer version.

Agree Nanonano more likely 1/10th of those figures in my opinion. But it’s a cheap sensor with a mind boggling array of uses. If it finds its way into one smartphone that would be great but it could end up in all of them plus watches and other consumer goods before you look into automotive, industrial and military applications…..

The less than symbol in combination with the dollar sign was cutting the rest of the message off it seems

As for margins yes they might be high, but the volume is the issue for me. STM previously suggested the complete cost of the sensor is less than 10USD so Nanoco's slice of that pie might be quite small initially. As owners of the IP, that is where the money could come from as they can control the supply of this enabling technology, but it needs to have wide adoption and become a commodity in demand first.

As for margins yes they might be high, but the volume is the issue for me. STM previously suggested the complete cost of the sensor is

I give up it did it again. I must be typing something controversial....

For some reason the end of my message was cut off but it went like this.....as for margins they might be high, but the volume is the issue for me. STM previously suggested the complete cost of the sensor is

I'm increasingly of the opinion that Nanoco will feature. We know STM are involved with Nanoco. It is understood STM picked up where Apple left off. We know STM SWIR sensors incorporate colloidal quantum dots _ Jonathan Steckel confirmed this on many occasions. We know Vision Pro will require the best SWIR sensors that interact with the processor with time of flight being critical whilst being small and available at the right cost. There are too many crumbs here for it not to be in the headset. In my opinion.

I think a tear down won't confirm if CQD's are Nanoco's, that is beyond the technical capacity of even the geekiest of geeks. Instead, confirmation of STM SWIR sensors coupled with confirmation of a commercial supply to STM will be all we need to know.

As for margins yes they might be high, but the volume is the issue for me. STM previously suggested the complete cost of the sensor is

I’m in favour of what’s best for me….at the moment it’s opaque as to what that might be but I actually prefer the special dividend over a buy back.

Extract from Circular 20th June 2023 might give some clarity to the planned redistribution mechanism -

"The Company is proposing to undertake a Capital Reduction in order to facilitate the return of capital to Shareholders. The Company is currently restricted from returning capital to its Shareholders as it does not have distributable reserves.

· The Board intends to initiate a return of between £33 million and £40 million (or approximately 10 pence to 12 pence per share) using the second tranche of the proceeds of the Samsung litigation ($75 million) which is expected to be received during February 2024. No final decision has yet been taken as to the method of any such return of capital.

· Nanoco intends to retain approximately £20 million of cash (following the return to shareholders) to invest in R&D and commercial activities, a proactive IP licensing programme, payment of debt obligations, and to provide working capital through to the self-financing position that is expected to be achieved during 2025"

According to a brief search; Capital reduction is the process of decreasing a company's shareholder equity through share cancellations and share repurchases, also known as share buybacks. The reduction of capital is done by companies for numerous reasons, including increasing shareholder value and producing a more efficient capital structure.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

•A capital reduction is the decrease of a company's shareholder equity.

•Capital reductions are generally done through share cancellations, paid-back capital, or share repurchases (buybacks).

•Companies do capital reductions for a variety of reasons, such as for increasing shareholder value or producing a more efficient capital structure.

•Capital reductions must be performed according to the law and a company must undergo a series of steps to correctly do a capital reduction.

I’m of a similar mind.

The objective is to return value to shareholders yet many are of the view a special dividend will reduce the share price by the commensurate value which defeats the purpose almost entirely!

Unsurprisingly I disagree about the metrics around any ‘special dividend’ which seem too binary to me to suggest the SP will simply drop by an equal amount. The reason being companies are not valued on cash only. There are a myriad of levers that change all the time and Nanoco currently might not be valued in cash on which case the second tranche is possibly not fully factored in.