Member Info for TerrorWit

Seems like a well-qualified person with domain experience to take over from Tenner, a lawyer, now the Samsung legal action is complete.

I don't see any conspiracies. Just a business doing all the right things it can in the situation.

You poor lickle baa lambs! All ripped off by nasty old Brian who told you he'd make you millionaires but won only the massive sum of $130 million.

Nothing to with the obvious fact that you're all too inexperienced to have a proper perspective.

Selling whilst the stock has recently been on a strong upward trend because of all the silly stories here then. Cretinous.

"And sure enough, they blinked. Shareholders were bluffed. Even Terry must be able to see the writing on the wall."

------------

Posters afraid of the facts will always seek to undermine posters who find facts.

The facts are that the legal settlement of $130m represents the highest single sum paid before trial by a large corporate to a small inventor for an infringement that anyone on this forum can refer to.

Another fact. Infringement is not theft, which is a criminal offence. Samsung had every right to test the patents in law. It is hyperbolic language like that example which informs us who got carried away and is who is now embittered by their own lack of understanding.

"ello, is that Cavendish? It's Kooba 'ere, U no, off LSE."

"Hello Mr Khyber, can you hold a moment whilst I go to my computer." (put's the call on the Tannoy)

"Don't be long, I need to tell you 'ow to run your business".

I am not saying I am happy or that I am unhappy. I am merely against all the blame-shifting onto management by forum fools who rarely read anything they're given properly, don't understand it when they do, make up silly stories, get carried away completely out of their depth and who then accuse the company of misleading them when events they were told might happen actually do so.

There's nothing wrong with selling the manufacturing and IP business and continuing with R and D. That was exactly the group's original intention when it first floated. It never set out to be a mass-supplier.

What Rubbish! I really don't think any of you have understood even the first thing about yesterday's RNS.

For starters Nanoco Group PLC in which we are invested is not the same entity as the trading company. Nanoco Group is not up for sale only the trading company and the IP are up for sale.

If the sale is successful the proceeds will be returned to shareholders and the R&D part of the Group will continue to invest and produce new IP to license in the future. There is no mention of de-listing.

This stratgey has nothing to do with Milkwood, Cable or anyone else. It was reached by the board who took external advice and it is perfectly correct.

Honestly, sometimes being on this board - it's like communing with protozoa.

It has always been a waste of time attempting to explain to any of you (bar one or two exceptions). Even when the vast majority of shareholders vote for the board's recommendations you all continue to believe in your silly stories and that you could do better.

"AI could have written a far better update too…this one really makes little much sense. "

_________

It makes perfect sense to me.

That got truncated, might try again in the morning

"Why has it taken 20 months to still not start legal action for infringement? Gathering evidence? Are they going to fund the same as before whereby other parties make a killing and we end up with not a lot?"

__________

1. Litigation is horrid and distracting. That's why they were unable to find more customers during the last battle. It would not surprise me if Tenner is leaving because he doesn't want to expose himself to it again. I wouldn't and I know many others who had burn-outs that way. Same probably goes for the other directors. Frankly I don't know how I survived some of things I had to face up to (although they were good training for putting up with pussies like you lot).

2. The last litigation cost

Why do you have to make it so complex? They're taking advice and will see what the company is worth since they clearly think it's worth more than the market currently believes. They have enough capital to continue as they have been after some trimming but it may be that there's someone with much more capital again who grow the company faster. They haven't said they need external investment to pursue infringers, only that they need to invest and they need to balance that with preserving cash and all their other imperatives.

Always so personal and always talking out of your ring pieces, which must be very sore after years of farting out such utter nonsense.

Back to 13p and climbing. Has Nanoco been taken over yet muppets?

"We were all misled, the only difference is the rest of us aren't in denial about it."

------------------

No, you mislead yourselves and you are in denial. That is why I am happy with the outcome and you are all so embittered.

I have asked before but I will ask again. Can you find another single example of any small business who settled a patent dispute with a company the size of Samsung before trial and got paid anything like as much as Nanoco got and on time?

The answer is that there isn't such an example so you can't find one but you still won't accept how wrong you all were because as Paul Simon once wrote.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

"Terry, you are the worst judge of a situation I have ever come across, bar none."

---------

Says the one who thought the settlement would be over £1bn and who then put his money into a company that got liquidated. Thing is Feeks, you allowed yourself to lose all perspective and you've never got it back.

Mu judgements always seem to accord with what the majority do and they aren't represented by gibbering fools who post here.

There's nothing wrong with the existing management or their strategy. All they have to so is persevere long enough to execute. This is why Cable and Milkwood bought and it's why, whenever there's a company vote the whole BoD has been re-elected by huge majorities.

You like to spread a different narrative because with all your massive experience of corporate law (ie none whatsoever) you think they should have won more against Samsung and you feel let down by that. That is not about them though, it's about all the false expectations you created with your fantasy-land, farted-out speculation years ago.

There's no evidence that anyone plans a takeover, that any shareholders are conspiring or for any of the other speculation you've farted out since Milkwood's first holdings declaration. You know nothing about them or what their plans are but you make stuff up to reconcile your personal bias because, as a narcissist, it doesn't occur to you that you might be wrong or that anyone who sees things another way to you might be right.

No-one would risk a take over because, as we know from Hamoodi's miserable attempt, it would lead to Pickett and all the other PhD's walking out.

No Kooba!

You're the one who spends all his time inventing fantasies on the basis of no business knowledge whatsoever. The truth is you have no information to support your confident assertions and when on rare occasions they eventuate it 's only because they're obvious or because you make so many that statistically some are bound to be right.

True experts don't make predictions on the basis of ignorance and intuition, they look at the cold facts. You just fart them of your bum all day.

"I have a lot of faith in my view on what will transpire here. "

Glad you do since you are clearly talking out of your Khyber

No sensible business would take over Nanoco Ddubya since it's main assets are people like NP who would value his autonomy and might not stay afterwards.

I don't think a takeover is at all likely since whilst anyone with the money can buy the company there would be no way for them to guarantee that they would be able to retain key staff who possess very specialized knowledge and expertise.