Member Info for TerrorWit

Kitchen guy?

I'm an engineer and architect.

I don't know NGR, I've only had time to read the first paragraph and will be busy all day. No doubt when I look in this evening all these posts will have been smothered with cultish panic-mongering.

Cool heads will prevail.

Honestly I don't think I've ever seen such an over-reaction to news.

All that's happened is that STM have advised Nanoco they won't be placing a second order this financial year, which ends this month, so Nanoco have updated guidance.

The sky hasn't fallen in.

Cavendish have issued a revised note stating they expect FY revenue to fall from £8.45m to £7.9m. Hardly any difference.

It's a buying opportunity since the stock is now below cash.

Can someone clarify when FY 25 starts? Was it not yesterday?

Cultists and Muppets, have you all prayed to the Hamoodi the Almighty yet today?

It just means that the order will come in FY25 or from Gen 2 materials. If the company was concerned it would cancel the buyback. I expect it's taking time for STM's customers to develop their products around the sensors, which is what we should expect since they're new.

It's a very small and temporary setback typical of the the kind that all growing tech companies experience. It won't have much impact in the medium term and it isn't the end of life as we know it.

Now please crawl back under your stones.

Ah Yes! TwoGoodToDie, he who wields the unbreakable sword 'Miscarriager' having wrested it single-handedly from the vice-grip of the giant marshmellow of Samsung.

...etc

All Hail Troublesome The Magnificent, he stands by Kooba the Great in the splendid halls of the NanoCult (ie KFC)

Muppet ... etc

I see the regular Nanoco cultists are still spreading their toxin here again this morning.

One would imagine that anyone who's invested in a company would support it it but no, if you want to be lauded on the Nanoco forum it's necessary for you to subscribe to the pretence that you've been lied to and ripped off by management and that anyone who tries to contribute on the basis of having relevant, useful knowledge and experience must be a lying narcissist with warts. If they claim to be financially successful then they're bullied and ridiculed for that too.

This is how The NanoCult formed it's own self-reinforcing echo chamber of lies, myth and conspiracy. We observe examples elsewhere in the post truth world where access to the internet has provided everyone with the means to create their own worldviews swaddled by similar weak minds who cluster around them for emotional warmth and protection from the hard, cold facts.

-------

The truth is that The NanoCult all got carried away with their own avarice, bought more shares than they should have and can't accept that the Samsung settlement was never going to conform to their desperation to be rescued from self-imposed financial distress. Anyone who wants can go back and see what they were all saying around the start of last year and during the long run up to the cancelled trial when figures of multiple billions of dollars were routinely ramped by all the regulars.

The NanoCult twist and turn every conversation on it's head by curating information to match their biases, ignoring company progress.

Thankfully we see that the majority of sensibly silent shareholders who vote see things the right way up. We also see high profile executives joining the company and detailed, thorough presentations. In the end there will be no resisting the bright future and the NanoCult will writhe and then sulk away.

Meanwhile, they'll bully and disseminate, cheat, twist, lie and insinuate. Withing their shrunken heads and damp caves it's easier for them than to admit they were wrong.

Ddubya, what's your view of the sums that were suggested around 6 January 2023, those who suggested them or did not demur from them?

Do you not agree that these sums turned out to be wildly optimistic, out of touch with reality and that this is what lead to the ongoing, unjustified crusade against the company?

Do you realise that you're "puffing the stock"?

Here are some post I found from around Jan 6. Mine seem to have vanished but so have a lot of others from members who seem to have vanished but not returned.

Feeks

Posts: 4,972

Price: 44.70

No Opinion

RE: This board's been busy! Is it time?5 Jan 2023 10:59

There was one patent trial case I spotted where the disagreement was settled very soon after the verdict. This was presumably something which suited both parties as it would mean an up-front payment to the wronged party and the avoidance of further lengthy appeals where the final amount of damages and license fee would remain uncertain. 

At the point a verdict is reached the damages award is crystallised. Samsung will be motivated to settle to avoid a big multiplier where the jury has also confirmed wilful infringement. This might suit Nanoco too. Let's say, for example $750m is awarded in damages on the basis of wilful infringement and Samsung appeals in the hope this is reduced to less than $500m on appeal. Nanoco's potential damages therefore range between $750-$2.25bn. 

There will be a delay whilst the judge decides what multiple to impose and whether to set the future license fee.

In the above scenario $1bn with that money paid immediately certainly might be attractive to both sides. Nanoco assures its future and Samsung notionally "saves" $1.25bn. That's what I think is mostly likely to happen - a deal soon after the jury verdict - because Samsung may not realistically hope to stretch this out forever for its own advantage if it loses at this trial. But let's wait and see.....

ShearClass

Posts: 2,900

Price: 58.00

Strong Buy

RE: Settlement6 Jan 2023 14:20

Applying the $14.4-18 in lost revenue per TV to 36m TV's sold to June 2022 = $518-648m. Say they sold another 5m in H222 and the figure becomes $590-738m. 

Indeed at a run rate of 10m unit sales per annum, NANO would be earning $144-180m per annum in royalties back on Edison's workings. 

Also bear in mind that at 10m sales run rate, Samsung is making >$20b in QLED revenues per annum... even assuming a slim 10% operating margin, paying Nano $1b compensation + $180m per annum isn't going to touch the sides. 

Now ask yourself why NANO would dream of settling pre trial unless Samsung had agreed to something along the lines of the methodology suggested by Edison? Why would they even entertain it?

troublesome

Posts: 14,414

Price: 58.40

No Opinion

RE: Fair value6 Jan 2023 14:27

Thanks for the assessment, much appreciated.
Lol ' very conservative view '
IMO that would be nowhere near 'fair value'
The market must have woken up with blurry eyes this morning

Give us a reason that won't use the existing face ID tech that's been in iphones since 2017?

Okay but I'm not the one whose invested in a company whilst disdaining the people who run it so I'd say that if anyone's a narcissist (or insane or a fantasist) in this conversation it's not me.

Okay, in that case forgive me but are you suffering from cognitive decline? I'm really trying to understand what motivates your posts, which are invariably so far below the standards of insight required on the stock market.

Is it that you're a lonely old man who's only social stimulation comes from constantly provoking genuine shareholders? If so, some of us have had sufficient, thank you.

I'm sorry for my part NGR

_______

Xenon, what you may not know is that it's past runaway speculation that has caused toxicity when the dreams have collided with reality and leading to accusations. We've been round this loop three times now, once with Dow, then Apple and most recently Samsung. Others will disagree but I've found the company guidance to be as good as it can with well-designed, professional presentation documents. People will say they want to know more but there's only so much that can be revealed and it's irresponsible for the company to make promises before it should.

Anyone who's read this board since before the settlement will remember that I thought it would be in the region of £50-£100m because I estimate that Nanoco would have accepted a sum of that magnitude in 2015. I was relentlessly hounded for this opinion, which turned out to be spot on by cult believers who continue to cyberbully me because they find it impossible to reconcile the outcome with their fantasies.

This is an example of The Backfire Effect, a well known form of cognitive dissonance or belief persistence, which you can find out about here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance

Since there's yet more microaggression in that. I initiated in 2017 but bought three times as much between 6 and 10p in 2019. It's yet another example of Kooba trying to make a point with cherry-picked information in order to undermine me because I don't agree with his stories about Tenner and the board.

Also I haven't seriously suggested anyone needs medical attention. All I've done is point to relevant phenomenological psychology so they can reflect. I think a little therapy is generally a good thing for most people not least because it can help them to better rationalise financial choices.

You shouldn't put your money in if what the company tells you in official announcements is insufficient to reassure you.

-------

Accusing people of needing medical attention because they have their own point of view is typical cult behavior exhibited by those who can't conceive of any perspective but theirs. It's offensive abuse.