Member Info for NGR1616

Troublesome "Might be the Chery on the cake !" I can just picture you sitting there thinking how clever and funny you are using plays on words all the time and being so pleased with yourself.... good for you.

Retail investors could follow LOAM and exited as well.

TG2D they can cut the cost base overnight. I've witnessed it before on several cycles in the O&G industry.

Clearly they didn;t appreciate the risks otherwise they would have retained the cash. THeir confidence was very high. That was a mistake and I questioned the return at the time....better to have revenue then you could use a more traditional dividend mechanism over time to return the cash. Over confidence has put us in a perilous position. Hopefully that confidence can be rebuilt through the Asian Co or a new relationship(s) in the coming months and years otherwise......

They had a cash runway before the Samsung award that went out to 2025 based on reduced overheads/running costs etc. It's going to be a very bitter pill to swallow for the team who just started to enjoy the future prospects that the ST deal offered, but swallow the pill they must, and without delay. The company needs to go into hibernation mode.

I think it's important to recognise that people by nature hear what they want to hear. They don't hear words like "we are going to be part of an extensive supply chain which means the company will be subject to events and decisions outside of our control - as happened with the US customer in 2019....." and has happened again with the European secret customer in 2024.

You can blame BT and the company all you want but the cancellation of the project was not under Nanoco's control.

Possibilities :

1. Nanoco is not the optimum enabling technology for SWIR and ST dumped the whole project because of it despite accepting the product after stringent testing and evaluation

2. ST have an alternative supplier to Nanoco but if so why would ST employees be posting about project cancellation - surely they would be reassigned using the alternative material?

3. ST have failed to commercialise their product (which is what the Edison note implied- "We believe the termination is a result of the partner not making adequate headway in securing high-volume design wins for its sensors, combined with a broader refocusing of strategic priorities on their part. STMicro announced a profit warning and restructuring plan in July 2024" ) This could be for any number of reasons unrelated to the Nanoco component.

I'm leaning towards 3. Nanoco has always guided for a handheld and sensor sales in the 000's millions and that ST would not invest in the tech otherwise.... for some reason they have failed to secure high-volume design wins which suggests to me either no appetite for the tech in mobiles (yet) or their design for the global shutter camera was not correct. It is possible that there is another design bidding for integration into iphone/galaxy phones that is better in terms of performance, size, power consumption that has been accepted and ST; rather than go back to the drawing board, have decided enough is enough under the backdrop of its restructuring plan (cost cutting ergo headcount reduction) to invest elsewhere for the time being. They have not lost anything at the moment but could waste money redesigning the array and still not have it adopted.

There could be some tactics from the OEM as well in relation to price. I doubt SWIR is dead but it's clearly a major issue that could result in the demise of Nanoco as a limited company unless they take immediate action themselves to reduce costs by at least half.

£2m to Nanoco might have been the thin end of the wedge. We’ll never know, this industry is like the Cold War for secrecy.

They won’t be allowed a monopoly as you describe it.

Sonysemicon supplies Sony…..he says clutching at more straws after following crumbs.

Wait. So you think the SP tanked because the supply agreement wasn’t what you thought it should be?

ST didn’t walk. They have cancelled the whole project because they couldn’t sell their device….

Https://www.sony-semicon.com/en/products/is/industry/swir.html

*edit -

Nanoco have been blindsided by this as were the supposedly inside LOAM and it seems some ST employees. It’s disingenuous to suggest this is Nanoco’s fault and *NOT a strategic decision by ST.

Every business starts with one customer Kooba, I don’t think they had any other choices….

There was talk of a third….make that second customer relationship.

But it’s all on the Asian Customer who I hope is Sony. Until then they need to slash costs immediately.

Nanoco have been blindsided by this as were the supposedly inside LOAM and it seems some ST employees. It’s disingenuous to suggest this is Nanoco’s fault and a strategic decision by ST.

The problem is the word ‘device’ can be interpreted differently in different situations. We all consider a device to be something we buy but in the microelectronics industry it has a different meaning especially in relation to semiconductors.

What other concerns might that be Troublesome? I’m intrigued to hear the latest conspiracy theory…

For a person who has enjoyed a long and fruitful life now enjoying frequent long walks in the countryside Troublesome, you really are a bit of a repetitive bore.

TG2D the point is Nanoco’s dots are wanted. The ST device - the SWIR sensor global shutter camera it seems is what’s not wanted.

ST is dead to us for now. And it’s got SFA to do with Nanoco aside from we should have been more aware of the risks.

We need to understand more about the Asian Customer. If it has equal or greater potential we need to understand that along with the timeline. If the answers are not within the cash runway the glide path needs adjusted which sadly will mean redundancies at Nanoco which is always a great pity especially for a young company and team. A sale is not the preferred option if there’s still potential.

The fab is a wafer device facility that incorporates QD’s for evaluation to speed up development.