The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Troublesome, the likelihood of the S CEO being directly involved in these negotiations is pretty well zero. This is in the hands of the legal guys to thrash out legal detail base on the agreed term sheet. BT may be in constant contact with his legal team as this is critical to N, but the S CEO will only sign off final agreement, this is still just a pimple on the backside to S.
Thank you Ginodog.
Maybe now some of the newer posters will stop inundating this board with the utter drivel they have been putting up over the last couple of weeks which has totally spoilt what was previously a very good discussion forum.
Couldn’t agree more Patty, the deterioration of the comments in just one week is dreadful. I use to read and appreciate the comments, even with differing views being expressed. Now however it seems childish and even went on to vaccinations and fake news, absolutely nothing to do with Nanoco.
I am signing off while the standard is as it is, I will continue to hold but can do without reading the current dross being posted. I will check in every so often in the hope some of the current posters go back from whence they came and we can have an informed debate again.
Nanonano, I believe it is totally inconceivable that any settlement that S entered into would not (1) cover all global elements not just US, (2) cover all its exposure through subsidiaries, group companies or suppliers (i.e. cover Hanson and S Display and others) and (3) cover any supplies it makes to third parties such as Sony etc. Whatever we think of them they are a huge global company with extensive experience and they will cover all their bases in terms of their ongoing exposure.
Revolting, a royalty free license for a one off payment is quite feasible and it is clear from the RNS that is what is proposed in the settlement. It was certainly not the outcome most of us expected or wanted but that is the reality.
The simple fact is the prospect of a long drawn out affair which may have taken years to payout clearly did not appeal to Nanoco and, I would speculate, to our funders. We do not know the precise terms of the funding arrangements but maybe the very significant increase in interest rates plays into this. There could have been terms (and we simply do not know) whereby the funder as part of a successful outcome gets compensation for the time value of money he has invested, which has suddenly got a lot more expensive giving another incentive to settle now.
So having mulled things over for the last few hours and achieving very little real work I would put forward the following view.
Taking the most pessimistic view I can envisage for a worldwide settlement (no way Samsung would enter into anything other than worldwide to remove the German, China and other threat) I could see a low offer of £250m up front of which 40% to funders, lawyers etc. leaving £150m to Nanoco. Then another low ball £5 a unit ongoing license fee generating minimum £50m a year in worldwide royalties. Let’s take a very low multiple of say 7 so we have a total of £150+£350 = £500m without any value for other uses, STMicro etc. That is a SP of just north of £1.50 a share and in my view a very conservative view. One could easily argue for twice these levels and not seem unreasonable.
I think I will hold for now!
“Final” comment from me before I try to get some work done. Is it coincidence that the Samsung earnings guidance reported today fell 1.6 tn won below investors expectations. That equates to £1bn, do we think they had to take a provision for settlement into their results for the quarter??
I think there are a good few of us on this Board who find ourselves in a life enhancing position today. Well done all it looks like it was worth the ride, and thanks for all the comments and views along the way. We dId not all agree at every step of the way but we did all agree on the potential for Nanoco.
Going to have to shut this page down now otherwise I will not get any work done today!
It has been a long 4 years, and longer than that for some I know, but those that kept the faith look like they/we will be rewarded. Never confessed to my better half that I had added significantly when the price hit the floor. Believe she thinks I only had c£10k invested here not £70k at an 18.3p average :)
NGR, Sammy I think there are elements from both of you that are correct, and also elements I disagree with.
I do not believe his main objective will be to get a settlement, however I do think it likely that Samsung may try and settle last minute and his being there will be helpful in responding quickly. I also think that any last minute offer from S will be very easy to reject as they will try a low ball offer way below what would be acceptable to N. They will not offer any reasonable settlement until they are really on the hook, and then will still try and pitch it low with the threat of endless delays.
DR777, who cares? For Samsung even at higher end of damages this is a pimple on the backside and they will automatically appeal anyway so not so high importance for them. For Nanoco this is likely to be a multiple of their total market capitalization and totally game changing. For BT not to be in attendance would be a dereliction of his duty imo.
I am totally with NGR on this one. Of course the CEO should be at the most important happening for the company, and I am confident the “organic business” will not collapse due to his absence for a few days. To suggest otherwise seems very odd. Yes there is zoom etc but F2F in the same time zone is critical for this short period. And I don’t mind if he stays in a decent hotel, bring this over the line and he will have earnt his crust many times over.
Barring an actual production order I don’t think this could have been more positive.
I do not want to wish time away, we should treasure every moment we have, but I cannot wait until January, I think Friday 13th will indeed be unlucky for some but not for Nanoco.
Merry Christmas everybody.