Member Info for TerrorWit

Khyber

Edison was the best guide in public but it didn't remove the need to do our own research, since, as you have explained to me, it was marketing and you knew that all along.

Since I'm an experienced litigant I understood the context and since you're not you messed up. Sorry.

Troublesome

You are completely unaware of yourself

Kyber

So what you're saying is that you relied on marketing from Edison instead of your own research?

Troublesome

"@Terry

Your name-calling is not becoming of one who is supposed to be so noble observing his ignorant plebeians ! "

My name is TerrorWit, not Terry and you're a narcissist

Kyber

That's not right. For one thing you don't have any mates.

Anyway the company has always explained that Edison work only from information in the public domain.

So many stories from your desperate-to-be-liked mind.

Freaks

"publicly stated litigation strategy"

There is no such document and it would be ridiculous to produce one since Samsung would have read it. It's all part of the mess in your head.

Kyber

That's nonsense since, for starters, the company has no editorial control over Edison. You're deliberately positioning it that way only to blame-shift away from your own mistakes, which you will simultaneously claim you never made in the first place.

The company has enough cash for five years trading thanks to BT and the other officers

No-one is toast. The whole BoD could have been removed long ago if enough shareholders agreed with the outlying narcissists here but they didn't.

"The board got less than 30% of shareholders voting for them in the AGM ..That was the bulk of those who bothered to vote though. About half of that would be LOAM who have now sold over 2/3rds of their holding in the tender taking their voting power well down. Oryx were also a supportive holder with over 3% ..they sold before the tender. "

----------

You can't count those who didn't vote as if they agree with you but that is what you're trying to do. It's delusional narcissism.

I'm behaving like 90% of shareholders

"If its nonsense, what's your problem ?"

_____

Rule 5 h

You will not post short no-sense posts.

"NGR , no BT pinned the grounds for settlement on the specific factors I've mentioned, and by reference to significant shareholder value and transformational outcomes. Even at the lower end of forecasts."

_________

Feeks - You got carried away and misinterpreted BT. Others told you at the time and have been telling you since. >90% of voters supported BT's re-election twice. You're behaving like a child.

So you don't want to do your own research then?

Isn't that how you all got into such a state? Bouncing off each other in this dark little cave instead of talking to professional advisors?

I didn't expect anything Feeks because I'm an experienced litigant and because the whole narrative from Nanoco was always conditional on success, how the case would proceed and what the judge, jury and ultimatley appeal court would find.

Anyone whose been to court knows anything can happen and that no particular result can be guaranteed or forecast. Whatever BT said was in that context and not in the context of the dreams of a few shareholders who got ahead of themselves.

Look, what I suggest, since you're all so sure you have a point, is that you club together to find a few £000 then go to a specialist IP legal firm like Briffa Legal, explain why you feel aggrieved and get them to brief a barrister to give you a professional opinion on why things happened like they did.

I've explained more times than I can remember, everyone is fed up with the conversation and all you do is claim I don't have a sensible answer because whatever I say isn't what you want to hear.

Feeks

During the whole litigation you listened only to those who confirmed your biases and you became a danger to yourself and others, some of who still tick up your posts. My best answer to your question is that you should sue if you think you have a case. As far as I can recall that is the best idea you've had.

You would have been far better off listening to those of us who've been there but sometimes there's no helping people who think they know stuff.

Smithy

They're not trying to talk the share price down. They are delusional narcissists who really do believe Tenner reads them and needs to listen. They see this as the way to change things. Crazy but true.

There used to be a different group of echo chamber posters who said the same type of things about Edeleman claiming that the share price would double if he was sacked yet within weeks of his resignation the share price halved.

They are disappointed by the outcome of their gamble on a litigation they didn't understand and this is where they complain because no-one at Nanoco or any of the regulators does.

___

On your Edison point. I think the broader take out is that we now have to wait for the next trading update when, hopefully sales visibility will be restored but, you're right, implementation within a smartphone is the ultimate objective.

I think suing Nanoco is the best idea you've ever had. It'll teach you how wrong you all are.

BT "Hello Mr Mintz, I've got that Idiot Kooba on the line and he's with his mate Feeks, they say they're going to sue."

Mintz "ROFL"

If you think I know nothing then you can ask a lawyer and see if they think you're nearer the facts than I am. I advise that you all go and do that as soon as possible then perhaps all this ridiculous trolling can stop; especially if the lawyer is also a psychiatrist.

I think the best thing would be for you to go discuss it with a lawyer.

Please carry on Kooba. This is the best entertainment ever.