Member Info for TerrorWit

Nanonano

I suspect you may not be thinking of marketing in the same way that I do. I don't see it as a subset of advertising but more as an all-embracing strategic tool. I'm a big fan of Seth Godin on this .

https://seths.blog/

I agree that returning so much cash has reduced their options and that may prove to be unwise in hindsight but we don't yet know if there have been discussions with other prospective customers that they're not able to disclose.

I'm reserving judgement until after the next public Q and A.

I think it may be a problem with university spin outs that the scientists who make staggering inventions try to market them whereas the more logical strategy is to try to work out want the market will want and invent that. Graphene is a good example. A Nobel-prize winning invention but every company who's tried to commercilise it has gone bust because they can't produce it cheap enough for the market. Based on all the market analysis I was hopeful that CFQDs would be different but so far the only real taker has been Samsung.

Not easy though. Indeed, what they have attempted is very hard and I should think that having come so close again they are all very down right now. A broader customer base is the only viable way forwards.

Glib

Yet somehow the tech hasn't sold to the market so someone along the chain hasn't understood what the market wants. That's what needs looking at.

Edison

"Estimates cut, lengthy cash runway

We have reduced our FY25 revenue estimate by £2.5m, while leaving our cost base estimates largely unchanged (fixed cash cost base of £7.2m) ... FY25 net cash reduces to £13.0m (from £15.2m previously) giving Nanoco about 20 months of cash runway, even if no further revenue-generating partnerships are secured."

-----------

This isn't a crisis. Many small companies would love to be in this position.

The only reason to preserve cash is to make it last longer but there's no point in that if it's just going to delay running out later because there are no orders.

Therefore, logically, the first thing to do when sales are lost is invest in marketing to replace them. Always has been, always will be. Many companies who adopt this strategy get new opportunities that would not otherwise have arisen so, in the long run, losing a customer, especially if it is one upon which the business has become too dependent, can release the business to do better things.

Marketing should be thought of to include R&D to develop more appealing products. Perhaps at Nanoco R@D has lead marketing and maybe that if anything is where they've gone wrong.

If you're the type who puts 2 and 2 together and makes 222, as with the Apple Vision Pro speculation, then it's not surprising you would be making unjustified accusations today.

I think the litigation success was almost miraculous but that it would have distracted them. That will be one of the main factors that weighed on their decision to end it with far more money than anyone has ever paid in a similar situation.

I don't find them ambiguous either. It's just that they can't make announcements based on speculation. Once you understand that and that they are doing their best to act in good faith it's not so hard to accept the disappointing news that they lost an order since that good faith carries into the knowledge they they will also do their best to pick themselves up once again.

I think the problem with most of you is that you don't like living with uncertainty, which is a natural human condition that you have to overcome to be a successful investor in risky stocks.

I'm not saying I know what's going to happen next but it's hard to imagine they'll be even more bad news now that they have capital and capacity to confidently look for more customers. However, if all you can do is make up negative stories then I don't believe you're thinking clearly or helping and you really should sell now, as you would have been better off to do sooner.

"I was the only one that highlighted the business risks and got mocked by some suggesting below 12p now 8p! "

---------

TwoGood2Die

This was because your reasoning was wrong and still is. No one would have disagreed that if STM cancelled the price would drop but you didn't say that would happen and you didn't notice that STM had issues two profit warnings. You just repeated hateful insinuations about Brian.

I bet Kooba's a prepper who lives in a half-buried tin shed lined with old copies of the Daily Express, which he reads whilst eating cold baked beans and drinking Lucozade Zero. Imagine the stench.

Forgot to point out that all those who've been claiming LOAM were inside need a long think after yesterday when they took a loss.

Broadly concur NGR. Either they should have been more open to the possibility that STM might withdraw or they have taken that into their thinking and are confident they have enough alternative prospects who we don't yet know about.

Deffo your option 3 NGR. Can see Nanoco taking small scale production in house so they have full control.

Reuters, 24 July

STMicro cuts full-year outlook for second time, shares tumble

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stmicroelectronics-cuts-full-outlook-second-051119594.html

For Nanoco it was bad luck, nothing else, but I wish they hadn't returned quite so much of the cash now.

"Andras is Director of Advanced Materials R&D for ST btw. He's ex Apple and Invisage"

"Haoran Yang

Materials Engineer / Chemist at STMicroelectronicsMaterials Engineer / Chemist at STMicroelectronics "

---------

Xenon,

Thank you for interjecting with these useful insights. Do you know if either of these individuals are staying with STM or might they be open to working at Nanoco to create a small chip fab using the recently installed equipment? Is that feasible in your opinion?

Thank you.

I've often said you were all narcissists but today you've really proved it. Jubilant, as you all are, that a UK company has lost a great export opportunity and other small shareholders have lost money. You all seem to be enjoying it far too much.

PS - Feeks, I never "tipped" Nanoco. You will recall that I was very careful not to do so when pressed. All I ever said was that everything will be alright if they execute. Your straw man arguments are designed because you have never been able to reconcile yourself to being wrong about the legal case are as pathetic as the name-calling, infantile bully you have shown yourself to be again today.

Feeks

You and your friends are little narcissists who called the settlement wrong and who want revenge. Don't kid yourselves that isn't the only reason why you're here

And, on the subject of revenge, please may I remind you of your revenge trade into another stock that went bust within weeks.

I am surprised you have the nerve.

"What is moronic…your term Terry.. is to suggest they don’t cut costs and actually increase the cash burn ..”doubling down” on self funded r&d without any certainty of any return on that investment. "

---------

So you mean that entrepreneurs should never invest in order to get a return? If so, that explains why you have never directed a company. If business was run on the basis you suggest we'd all still be living in trees.

There's an episode of Star Trek where Spock leading a small crew gets lost in a space shuttle, out of contact with only a few hours fuel left. The crew want to preserve the fuel to stay alive but, being logical, Spock jettisons and then ignites it creating an emergency flare. At first the crew are horrified and convinced they'll die immediately but the flare results in their rescue. It's a direct metaphor. Nanoco can choose to die slowly, as you suggest, or it can give more customers more reasons to buy by spending money on improving its offer, as I suggest logically.

.... and imagine trying to find new customers with weak finances during a years' long litigation. STM pulling out underlines the wisdom of settling early with Samsung.

"If they had gone to trial there would have been a result to base valuation on..so it would not be a total up in the air position of uncertainty we were in pre trial ..even if it was not fully resolved. "

___________________

This only goes to show once again that you have zero legal knowledge or experience.

Had they gone to trial then, whatever the outcome, the company would now be bogged in appeals. You can see what happens to other stocks during appeals. It's anyone's guess where the valuation would be today, especially following the Amgen case.

Not only that but they would certainly have no cash to throw at R&D, Director recruitment and sales.

Moronic comment Kooba.

"Some are in denial at the position the company finds itself in ..there is no prospect identified that might provide any meaningful revenue for years..and then all on one unidentified Asian customer . "

_________

If this were correct the shares would have no value. No-one is in denial. Loss of the STM is undeniably not the news anyone wanted but the company has cash and therefore the agency it needs to act appropriately in the circumstances.

Most small businesses live hand to mouth and have debts. Count your blessings Nanoco isn't one of them.

.... and to double down on R&D