Member Info for stt1

Based on my assertion, I've taken a punt. Not worth more than a punt given the current known info in public domain.

Still a risk but worth a punt.

I think there'll be a settlement amount around $200m gross and fees of around 50%.

The sp reaction isn't a surprise.

The risks have been in public domain for a while.

The rampers have been manipulating the info and over promising, under stating the risks. They clearly been wrong footed by the 'settlement' but it wasn't a surprise.

With any 'no win no fee' the backers always want their fees as soon as possible and via the easiest route. A settlement is the easiest route to get their fees.
The BoD hands are tied. If they refuse the settlement then the backers can walk away. In which case the company will be left to pay the fees and find funding for future litigation. They can't afford to refuse a settlement.

If Samsung walk then it's a different matter.

The media had already published a 'high of $500m' if Nanoco win the trial, so, by definition, any settlement would be lower.

Turcan was a NED and the fact there was selling says everything.

Longshort
"ST1 Where is your proof of LO selling you do not have it as they haven't "

Go to the top of this page. Click on director deals and you'll see lots of sells by 'Turcan', Lombard fund manager appointed as NED.

He was appointed to maximium shareholder value with business activities and litigation.

From Nanoco rns when Turcan was appointed:
"Henry is a fund manager at Lombard Odier Asset Management (Europe) Limited, Nanoco’s largest shareholder, with a focus on active engagement with the companies in which it invests. He has been advising and investing in UK smaller companies for over 20 years and has extensive experience of assisting public companies in creating value for all stakeholders."

Dr Chris Richards, Chairman of Nanoco, commented:

“I am delighted to welcome Henry to the Board of Nanoco. As a significant shareholder representative, Henry has been closely involved with Nanoco for a number of years. The additional capital markets experience he brings to the Company will further support the Board’s efforts as we work to deliver maximum shareholder value from our organic business activities and litigation against Samsung during a potentially transformational period for the Company.”

The link is to directors talk... check it for yourself... Aug 2019

or this link provides from 2013...word transformational used...
The bod like the word...

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/business-news/nanoco-narrowed-losses-after-transformational-1755467

HenryHistorian,
"For me and in the books of every other investor transformational means at least doubling of the share price".
"And this was said when the share price was already in the 30p+ range."

No it wasn't. As mentioned in my previous post.

In this article dated 19th Aug 2021, when Lombard's Turcan was appointed NED, the word transformational was used.
The sp on 19th Aug 2021 was 19p, so going by your assertion (and every other investor according to you) the sp has already 'at least doubled'.

"The additional capital markets experience he brings to the Company will further support the Board’s efforts as we work to deliver maximum shareholder value from our organic business activities and litigation against Samsung during a potentially transformational period for the Company.”
https://*************.net/nanoco-group-appoints-henry-turcan-as-non-executive-director

HenryHistorian
"I am continuing to hold on to all my shares as I trust BT that transformational in value does not mean a market value of GBP 180m. "

What does transformational mean? A $10m cash injection could be transformational.

In fact 10 YEARS ago, the company said a deal with DOW was transformational!! They do seem to like that word!!

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/business-news/nanoco-narrowed-losses-after-transformational-1755467

There you go, I did warn about the huge Lombard selling. It was an obvious red flag.

From my previous post in this message stream:
"Despite the 'settlement' announcement, there was significant selling down to Sept sp level.

Lombard selling - read why Henry Turcan was appointed and ask why Lombard was selling significant amounts... I don't think Lombard selling and Nanoco going for a settlement is a coincidence...
Let's see.

Lombard Henry Turcan was appointed as NED in Aug 2021. Yet over the past few months, there has been significant selling by Lombard.

He was appointed to maximium shareholder value with business activities and litigation. Yet Lombard has been selling heavily???"

Ginodog,

" He’s been trolling Tremor (ex Blinkx) holders for 10 years."

I see trmr is down from 870p, under 2 yrs ago, to 280p today BASED ON THE RED FLAGS I warned about. I'm glad I sold at 844p based on my own research.
I see Nano has also crashed and my comments were correct.

You have a history of your holdings crashing on you because you don't read the company/sector newsflow.

Why you no listen??? lol

My posts are all there for any reader to go through. My red flags warning on trmr (was blnx/rthm/tap) have been proven conclusively. Blnx high was eq sp of around £28, current 280p, 90% crash and Ginodog thinks I was wrong..lol

The adtech bubble burst and the court case has caused trmr immense problems.
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/stt1/?page=13

There you go, I did warn you.

From my previous post in this message stream:
"Media have published the award could be as HIGH as $500m (note $ not £ as used by some - The award is in $ and the sp in sterling.) That potential $500m award was based on Nanoco winning the trial. Given it's agreed talks then the final settlement is likely to be lower.

The fees could be around 30-40%, given it's pre-trial talks.

Work out the possible award, deduct the fees and look at the mcap... It's not difficult to see why there was selling."

Media have published the award could be as HIGH as $500m (note $ not £ as used by some - The award is in $ and the sp in sterling.) That potential $500m award was based on Nanoco winning the trial. Given it's agreed talks then the final settlement is likely to be lower.

The fees could be around 30-40%, given it's pre-trial talks.

Work out the possible award, deduct the fees and look at the mcap... It's not difficult to see why there was selling.

"Had the trial gone ahead and nanoco prevailed, some in the city speculated it might have been awarded upwards of $500m."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nanoco-in-line-for-windfall-after-samsung-concedes-in-patent-battle-xrh2k9dm3

Despite the 'settlement' announcement, there was significant selling down to Sept sp level.

Lombard selling - read why Henry Turcan was appointed and ask why Lombard was selling significant amounts... I don't think Lombard selling and Nanoco going for a settlement is a coincidence...
Let's see.

Lombard Henry Turcan was appointed as NED in Aug 2021. Yet over the past few months, there has been significant selling by Lombard.

He was appointed to maximium shareholder value with business activities and litigation. Yet Lombard has been selling heavily???

"Henry is a fund manager at Lombard Odier Asset Management (Europe) Limited, Nanoco’s largest shareholder, with a focus on active engagement with the companies in which it invests. He has been advising and investing in UK smaller companies for over 20 years and has extensive experience of assisting public companies in creating value for all stakeholders."

Dr Chris Richards, Chairman of Nanoco, commented:

“I am delighted to welcome Henry to the Board of Nanoco. As a significant shareholder representative, Henry has been closely involved with Nanoco for a number of years. The additional capital markets experience he brings to the Company will further support the Board’s efforts as we work to deliver maximum shareholder value from our organic business activities and litigation against Samsung during a potentially transformational period for the Company.”

https://*************.net/nanoco-group-appoints-henry-turcan-as-non-executive-director

I think the BoD's hands are tied.

I think it's likely the backers will push for a settlement even it's not the BoD want. Best to get the fees now than risk going to trial and losing.

If the BoD refuse then the backers would still want their fees and could walk away, leaving the BoD to fund future legal action.

Media have published the award could be as HIGH as $500m (note $ not £ as used by some - The award is in $ and the sp in sterling.) That potential $500m award was based on Nanoco winning the trial. Given it's agreed talks then the final settlement is likely to be lower.

The fees could be around 30-40%, given it's pre-trial talks.

Work out the possible award and look at the mcap... It's not difficult to see why there was selling.

"Had the trial gone ahead and nanoco prevailed, some in the city speculated it might have been awarded upwards of $500m."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nanoco-in-line-for-windfall-after-samsung-concedes-in-patent-battle-xrh2k9dm3

Bazzaman,
" I always try and filter negativity on these chat boards as they don't align with my own views"

It's confirmation bias... you end up missing all the red flags.

If a bear point can be countered then it makes the bull case stronger.
If bull point can be countered then it makes the bear case stronger.

The sp crash since the spike was as I predicted.
Pump and dump.

Richywar
"the rise is crazy really when you consider all the contract win RNS’s that have come before it and then the following red days trades"

Exactly.
The hvo (as orph before name change to hvo) sp was around 15p in June, only 5 months ago. After the H1 results and subsequent contract, the sp still dropped to under 10p.

There hasn't been any news over the past week to justify such a rise. Tipsheets tipping it and traders come in and then exit at a profit. The lth, who were holding orph since they were around over 40p only last year are at a significant loss. So they need to entice the gullible in so to reduce their losses. The pump/dump gang then move to their next target.
Look at polb, sharp falls this afternoon.

Look at the latest contract. It won't commence for a year and revenue won't be recognised until 2023 and 2024, results therefore will be published until spring/summer 2024 and June 2025, 1.5yrs and 2.5yrs time respectively!!! The house broker, Finncap, hasn't increases the target price for 1.5yrs, which says a lot.

"The study is expected to commence in Q3/Q4 2023, with the revenue being recognised in 2023 and 2024. "

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/hvivo/news/rns/story/w31yn3x

Dickie,
"How is it that Hvo is rising fast yet Polb is dropping?"

Because polb pump/dump has run it's course and so the pump/dump are moving to their next target.
The same sudden fall in sp at polb will happen here once the pump/dump gang believe it's run it's course before moving onto their next target. Then the gang will come out with reasons the gullible should hold, whilst they sell or blame the management if the sp falls, even if nothing changes.

Look at the chart and Orph history. The current sp is only where it was a few months ago before falling further and has several spikes followed by falls in the past.
A lot of holders here from when Orph was around 45p only last year. They obviously need to encourage the gullible in so they can reduce their losses.

Seen it so many times.

Benrum/Krusty,
"Speaking to the sales people "

Do you believe sales people will tell you things are bad??? Really?

Sales people's job is to portray everything is great so they can sell more. Otherwise they will be out of a job, won't they.
Apart from that HBs will still be busy as there will still be homebuyers going through the chain. Problems will show once those chains have completed and there's no more FTB at beginning of the chain.

The reality is:
Housing transactions down.
Help to Buy ended for new applications end of Oct.
Asking prices lower.
Mortgage approvals lower.
Mortgage interest rates trebled since last year so those who took out 2yr fixed rate in 2020-21 will now end up paying double/treble.
Supply of money reduced.
Lenders forecasting 10-15% crash in prices.
HBs reporting lower demand.
etc

Watch the demand fall off the cliff and supply increase.

Excellent presentation.
The BoD have always worked with integrity and followed their stated strategy.

In terms of change of govn.
Labour created the NHS and included private providers. If you look at the last labour govn, they spent billions on the NHS.
All that happens with a change of govn is they change things around the edges to stamp their own mark but they never change the core. It's been like that since the NHS was founded.

As an example, the previous Labour govn created the predecessor for NHS 111, NHS Direct, using private providers.

The Tories took the idea, changed the name to NHS 111 to stamp their own mark on it and developed it further.
For this reason, a change of govn has never been a deep concern for me.

"It was discontinued on 31 March 2014 and replaced by NHS 111.[2] As a part of the National Health Service, NHS Direct services were free, although the 0845 number was usually chargeable as a non-geographic number. Some landline providers allowed 0845 calls within "inclusive" minutes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Direct

Presentation tomorrow 10am:

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/totally-plc/register-investor