The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Oil and gas firms are being framed as the “devil incarnate” as general election rhetoric ramps up, a top North Sea dealmaker has complained.
Andrew Austin said is firm Kistos Holdings (AIM: KIST) is one of several which has pulled out of deals due to political uncertainty and that the windfall tax is being seen as a “victimless” crime as the UK gears up for an election.
Speaking to The Herald, he said: “Part of the problem is both parties are rightly trying to chase the 18 to 24 year old vote and in their minds climate change and oil and gas companies are the devil incarnate, therefore taxing them is effectively a victimless crime; that’s what’s driving it on both sides of the house.”
Investment ‘off the table’
Mr Austin, who built up his former company RockRose Energy into a £250m business, said committing fresh capital to projects in the North Sea “is definitely off the table” until there’s certainty as to “the Government and the Government’s position”.
There have been four changes to the windfall tax since 2022 under the ruling Conservative government, while Labour, which is leading the polls, has promised a “proper windfall tax” should it win power.
Last month, the CEO of Hartshead Energy told Energy Voice the uncertainty on Labour’s plans have led to it cutting project team jobs.
Meanwhile the party’s pledge – which includes cutting investment allowances while hiking and extending the levy – has led to warnings it will kill off North Sea investment.
Kistos’ partner in the West of Shetland, TotalEnergies, told Energy Voice last year that the uncertainty is impacting potential Final Investment Decisions for their projects in the region.
Mr Austin told The Herald that the windfall tax is not making Shell or BP the victim.
“The victims are the small independents who effectively have become the mantle-holders for the North Sea as the majors and super-majors have exited.
“You’ve seen it with Harbour, with Ithaca with Serica and us. These are the guys that are getting hurt.”
UK quantum dot company Nanoco has returned cash to shareholders through a tender offer after it received the final tranche of payments from Samsung in relation to an out-of-court settlement over an IP dispute.
Quantum dots are nanoparticles used to improve LED display lighting. The Korean electronics company was alleged to have breached Nanoco’s IP by using the technology. Last year, the companies came to an agreement in which Samsung would pay Nanoco $150mn (£122mn) in two tranches. As part of the deal, Samsung would be allowed to licence the technology.
At the start of this year, Nanoco received the second payment worth $71.75mn and decided to return £30mn to shareholders through the tender offer, which was pitched at a 25 per cent premium to the share price at the time it was announced. Among those cashing out were Swiss private bank Lombard Odier, whose stake has almost halved to 8.5 per cent, and chief technology officer Nigel Pickett.
Pickett sold 4.5mn shares at the offer price of 24p, earning over £1mn. The share price has since slipped back to 20p.
Management said the rest of the funds would be “invested in operational capability, enhancing future growth prospects, and improving gross margins”. This investment will focus on building out a new wafer device development and testing facility which the company says will be able to shorten research cycles by up to a third.
Nanoco is still in the early stages of its development. In the six months to January, it made just $4mn in revenue, and only $1mn in underlying revenue when the licence payments from Samsung are taken out. However, FactSet analyst consensus is forecasting revenue to reach $10.7mn by 2025 as the operational investment starts to take effect.
I see that Trouble beat me to sharing the link!
Nanoco Group has been granted a patent for a photodetector with a unique design involving two-dimensional quantum dots (2D QDs) dispersed in charge transport materials. The heterostructure photodetector includes specific materials like zinc, titanium, vanadium, or nickel in the interlayer, offering enhanced performance. A recently granted patent (Publication Number: US11903225B2) discloses a heterostructure photodetector designed with specific layers and materials to enhance its performance. The photodetector includes a first electrode, a first photoabsorbing layer made of a two-dimensional (2D) nanosheets, an interlayer made of a metal oxide with zinc, titanium, vanadium, or nickel, a second photoabsorbing layer made of 2D quantum dots (QDs), and a second electrode. The combination of materials and layers aims to create a built-in electric field for improved functionality. Additionally, the photodetector may include a transition layer between the two photoabsorbing layers, each layer may contain charge transport materials, and the overall thickness of the layers ranges from about 50 nm to 800 nm.
Furthermore, the patent details specific configurations and compositions for the photoabsorbing layers, including the percentage of 2D nanosheets and 2D QDs present in each layer. The patent also mentions the thickness and dimensions of the nanosheets, emphasizing their properties for optimal performance. Additionally, the inclusion of charge transport materials in each layer further enhances the photodetector's capabilities. Overall, the patent highlights a novel design for a heterostructure photodetector that leverages unique materials and layering techniques to improve its efficiency and sensitivity in detecting light.
NGR and his puppets have ruined this board. Is there a “block and ignore” function that we see on other platforms?
NGR - It’s only been deleted because you reported it!
We are close to commencing the farm-out process for licence EG-08 in Equatorial Guinea as we look to bring in a partner for drilling.
We secured a stake in EG-08 in Dec 23 and believe it has enormous near-term, infrastructure-led, exploration potential. #EOG
Funny - that’s exactly what NGR would say - Hold on - he just did!
Congrats Xen0n (NGR?) on your first post.
NGR - Ever wondered why there are a group of “embittered investors”?
Carlos - I feel strongly about holding this board to account. Certainly not a waste of my time (or life). What made you decide to invest here?
Tm58 - Yup - we’re are strange bunch! Sheer bloody mindedness in my case. Anyone considering whether to make an investment in Nanoco needs to know how the company treats its retail investors.
24p is the Tender Offer price. Fact!
Nanoco made sure it’s LTIP and Deferred Bonus Plan weren’t adversely impacted by its “return of value” - They are very good at looking after themselves!
“ They said they are returning value to the shareholders and they are returning value to shareholders”
When you do a raise at 37p and give back only 24p that is a destruction in (as opposed to a return of) shareholder value.
Kooba - I agree - Brian’s good at talking (just wish he had the walking to go with it).
“ Because they are professionals” - Other explanations are available!
It will be interesting to see how Hamoodi gets on with his litigation with LOAM.
Why? Maybe because the institutional investors had better information than the retail investors? How might that have been the case?
“ Until the board specifically guides differently, you can't make claims of discrepancies, misdirection, misleading or misguiding until there is more to go on”
Seriously?! Because they did such a great job on the settlement guidance didn’t they!!!