Member Info for TerrorWit

NGR, if you look on X (Twitter) Nanoco are giving out positive vibes that shine a totally different spectrum to that emanating from the worthless trolls found here.

It's like a black hole here, only the occupants are denser.

Just ignore it. It's pathetic NGR. Total losers.

so much bullying and all because my genuine legal experience has punctured this massive bubble of bull****.

"It looks to me that you are the one in the wrong swimming lane using your limited knowledge of legal action (as a plaintiff and possibly defendant, rather than as a lawyer) to draw conclusions that are not correct."

___________

Actually, if you knew just how wrong you are about even the most fundamental legal principles you would be embarrassed. This is exactly why you all (with one or two noble exceptions) over-estimated the damages and continue to do so. It's also why no-one can trust anything any of you claim about anything else to do with Nanoco, which claims you make up to suit your nasty narrative as you go along. It's just total bull here.

Take this point alone

"but against an overseas company known to be a very regular fixture in infringement cases Nanoco could have seen a very serious award with wilfulness and an ongoing royalty awarded..it could appealed but the award would grow during that period and it seems to me Samsung had exhausted its case anyway. "

__________

This demonstrates a clear lack of legal knowledge since no jury will ever be told about the past conduct of either party. Indeed they might well be cross-examined before being appointed to see if they had any knowledge that might prejudice their judgement.

It's also wrong to assume that the award would grow during the appeal. An appeal is always an opportunity to reduce the award by negotiating.

You really should "stay in your lane" Kooba.

"I am told the buyback was totally at the discretion of Cavendish "

_________

Nanoco gave "arm's length" discretion to Cavendish and Nanoco can remove that discretion.

It's absurd to be argue that Nanoco are at risk of running out of cash whilst they're buying their own shares.

Anyway, who told you? Your tea leaves perhaps; or did you cast asparagus?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/fortune_read_asparagus

Total gibberish.

I've got better things to do than listen to you lot any more today.

Troublesome

When was the last time you took Samsung to court and they paid you $150 million?

NGR

It's interesting to compare with the words used in the 1 September 2020 RNS

"Dr Michael Edelman, currently the Group's Chief Executive Officer (CEO), will step down from the Board with effect from 1 September 2020"

Nothing about new opportunities. I think the words used are chosen very precisely.

TwoGood2Die

"Having led the company through a period of significant change and delivered financial stability, CEO Brian Tenner has advised the Board of his intention to leave the Company to pursue new opportunities."

This means he's had a better offer.

Feeks

You sold out of outrage because your ridiculous estimates of the legal damages were not fulfilled. Ever since you've been accusing management instead of trying to understand why you were wrong that Nanoco would ever receive $billions.

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

"Having led the company through a period of significant change and delivered financial stability, CEO Brian Tenner has advised the Board of his intention to leave the Company to pursue new opportunities."

Management has delivered every milestone within their control. Tenner is leaving because he's had a better offer and it's nothing to do with the pathetic whinging and bullying of those who post here or on ADVFN or with the delay in further orders.

Anyone following Nanoco on X (Twitter) will see an entirely different and more positive picture than that portrayed here.

By the way. I don't think Hamoodi will settle with Lombard. He's too sure of himself. He claims to be a successful investor in litigation shares but I think I've had more litigation experience than he has. At least I've had enough to see other self-righteous people let their hubris drive them to an adverse court judgement they didn't expect urged on subtly by greedy lawyers.

He even thought he could achieve a hostile takeover against Tenner and look how that went. Kooba-like levels of Dunning Kruger, right there.

I choose no. 2 every time TW. And use that experience to educate unwary investors on the Nanoco bulletin board.

-------

Feeks

See, despite what you may think, that sentence describes how you express your bitterness. What any new experienced investor will learn from you isn't what you expect. They will instead do their research, see that the business has been turned around by winning more money than Nanoco ever had before and understand that you can't handle your losses and got carried away. That's assuming you have any impact at all, which personally I doubt.

You haven't moved on and taken the lessons. Obviously.

Two choices

1. continue to feel embittered, whinge and let everyone know it - result, you're probably make the same mistakes again

or

2. accept the situation and gain from the insight to think of your losses as an investment in a better strategy for the future.

"You also believed a licensing agreement would be struck, so you're in denial about your own disappointment. This is unhelpful to you and others on this forum."

_______

Flying Hi

My view (except apparently when I wrote a single post from long before the settlement that has been used to poke me in the eye in an out of context way whilst ignoring everything else I wrote) was that any out of court settlement was unlikely because the sides seemed too far apart. I think their apparent distance reduced after Amgen vs Sanofi, which I suggest everyone looks up since it changed the law.

I was surprised but pleased by the settlement and I correctly predicted that if it was to come it would be at the last opportunity before trial (but that wasn't a hard call since it often happens).

On the quantum of damages I don't recall offering a firm opinion except to say that it would be based on the true losses since the fundamental legal principle to all the other rules and precedents would imply the appeal court would try to put the parties where they would have been had a contract been signed in 2015.. Back then I suspect Nanoco would have ripped off both of Samsung's arms for £100m so $150m was more than I expected. It was even possible to conceive that the case could have been won with the legal costs exceeding the damages, which sometimes happens.

However, you are correct in the sense that I am very disappointed, not by Nanoco but by all the entirely foreseeable blame-shifting that's gone on here and on ADVFN and by Mr Hamoodi ever since. Any prospective investors looking here wouldn't stay long and I think that's a big part of the reason why the share price is where it is today.

All the past rampers that turned turncoat out of confected outrage are a disgrace. I wish they'd sell and leave the rest of us in peace from all their lies and motivated reasoning.

No-one found any companies similar in size to Nanoco, with little money who got litigation finance and succeeded in taking a company similar in size to Samsung (who have lots of money) to the patent court then settling for more than Nanoco got before trial and who then got paid on time.

So there have been tens of thousands of allegations against Nanoco, and Tenner in particular, made by non-legally trained posters both here and on ADVFN without evidence and now there's a thread with the title 'Good Riddance to Brian Tenner'.

Basically you all talked yourselves up into an impossible expectation that anyone from outside your support group of self-reinforcement would find ridiculous.

That's why RG and LOAM sold down.

Also, you did not appreciate that Tenner was in an impossible position from which he could not simultaneously give clear guidance to shareholders in public and maintain the perception of strength he had to show Samsung.

Two points emerge

1. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH

2. IF YOU DON"T KNOW ABOUT SOMETHING, ASK SOMEONE WHO DOES

This quote from Hugh Grant explains why having received a offer to settle Nanoco had no choice.

“I don’t want to accept this money or settle. I would love to see all the allegations that they deny tested in court. But the rules around civil litigation mean that if I proceed to trial and the court awards me damages that are even a penny less than the settlement offer, I would have to pay the legal costs of both sides.”

source https://ew.com/hugh-grant-why-settled-lawsuit-against-uk-publisher-8634861

This is normal practice procedure. In the UK the rules are written in Part 36 of the CPR here (I don't know where they are in the US because thankfully I've never had to know.)

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part36

"TerrorWit your silly question has been resoundingly answered. Closing your account is an empty promise anyway given that you've done that twice already.... but still remain in residence on this BB."

Says Feeks, a past ramper of Nanoco.

______

No my question has not been answered. Troublesome bless him has only provided a list of the top ten patent awards of all time based on initial findings. The list is not for out of court settlements before trial and it does not show the final awards after appeals or whether they were ever paid, let alone on time.

So far, after a day and a half, none of you have been able to write anything other than evasive waffle demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of how the legal process operates. This is how you all ended up with grossly inflated expectations over a relatively small case and got carried away and why you are all trying to scapegoat Tenner, who did an amazing job, instead of taking a life lesson.

There's another 24 hours to see if you can come up with a fair analogy.

Here's a challenge to all you know-all moaners. I'll close my account if any of you can find a single example of a small company ,like Nanoco, with no money that took a company the same size as Samsung to court over a patent dispute, settled before trial, got paid on time and received more that $150 million.

I'll check in on Monday to see how many of you succeed.

"They literally wet themselves."

------

This is the depraved, fascist language of populists and bullies who prefer their comfortable lies to the truth.