Member Info for NGR1616

You are indeed entitled to post what you want. What you can’t say is that I’m singing the praises of the board when all I’m doing is saying that people got overexcited at the prospects of a settlement and that attempts to remove the board could result in the assets being sold off cheaply.

I’ve also said that the board must deliver with commercial orders in their control.

So I’m saying do something else that doesn’t involve posting inaccuracies.

I’ve been invested in Nanoco for long enough that’s all that matters and before BT joined the company.

TS no i cant and i dont care.

I’m not signing their praises. Why don’t you just do something else Kooba.

Kooba I’m just a lowly long term holder - been here since pre BT days.

Nanostory and a couple of other ‘new’ posters created their accounts in February this year and are posting ad nauseam from the Hamoodi playbook. It doesn’t take Columbo to join the dots as to who the stooge is! It was Mr Nanostory on the bulletin board with a keyboard.

Nanostory is a Hamoodi or a facsimile of Hamoodi attempting to undermine the board. He deserves no favour.

It’s a pathetic attempt to diminish yet another pathetic attempt at undermining the credibility of the board….guilty 🤗

Nanostory - I went to Asda the other day and bought some food and drink. I didn’t buy everything though.

At the next results presentation my purchases will be in there in the figures but the stuff I didn’t buy won’t be.

That’s kind of like how RNS’s work too. Report what’s happened not what didn’t.

Really?

Agreed although once again I’d remind people that what happens upstream in the supply chain isn’t always in Nanoco’s control.

Meanwhile it seems people are still reading words like "could" and "possibly" and "estimate" as 'will' 'definitely' and 'precisely'

Now I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think a case will hold up on the tenet that words that imply something might be possible suddenly change to become statements of fact just because the actual outcome wasn't what we might have hoped for.

What’s strange is a bunch of new posters turning up after creating accounts on around the same date not long after actions were taken and all the posts seem to be quite shall we say…..informed. Anyone suggesting a bunch of long term posters who’ve been around before BT are in cahoots and don’t see that it’s you and your merry band of new posters working in unison is a muppet.

Occam’s razor…….

“ Why do you think this time is different?”. What makes you think a new board will suddenly unlock what’s been spoken about for so many years and force Nanoco’s technology to be adopted?

Let’s be honest, you want to break the company up and profit individually from it by replacing a board that people suggest are corrupt with one that likely will be.

Fantasy

This thread will self destruct soon! Legally.

Bauxiou….another new poster.

BEWARE PEOPLE!!!

I’m not so much backing the board as much as calling out fantasists who expected one thing and got another and can’t see how the board were effectively negotiating at all times and were unlikely to paint any other picture than a rosey one to secure a settlement that draws a line under proceedings rather than dragging it on with all the incumbent risks.

People sold in droves including LOAM for reasons unknown other than they read the guidance was at the low end and understood the implications and that didn’t marry up with expectations for a short term jackpot.

I’m in this for the long term. I’m hoping Nanoco grows significantly in the years to come to bolster my pension pot.

It’s done now. You could sell and cry about it or you can suck it up and wait for the anticipated future revenue from commercial orders.

Kooba just write to the FCA and tell them your sob story and that you want some recompense. I’m sure your cries will work. You can tell them how BT lied to you and that Mr Hamoodi (a rich bloke who thinks he shouldn’t have lost money) and some others on a chat forum who also lost money agree. It seems like an open and shut case so I don’t know why you’re wasting your time here when you could be sorting it all out for the rest of us.

What no costs attached? You are in lala land if you believed the telegraph and other publications giving their views with caveats meant that a potential trial outcome and a negotiated no blame settlement would marry up and make you wealthy overnight. Get over it.

They have subtle differences Troublesome….