Member Info for thomasbrowne

We currently have several interested parties indicating a possible purchase of nanoco, I believe/ strongly suspect one of the parties is samsung, and the other ,very possibly a Chinese based proposal, we have a very valuable iP estate, Samsung would want our IP estate ok, it's just the price I believe needs to be agreed, the very thought of another party snapping nanoco's IP estate would have Samsung sweating profusely if they buy us , or China buys us, and we can still keep our lawsuit against Samsung After a Chinese bid. Our shares will be all over the place until our bid comes in. Hopefully that shouldn't take to long.

GLA

Off topic, I like the other poster thought exactly the same thing , until I delved into her suicide story myself, and then I felt terrible, as I was sadly wrong in my thinking, her last Instagram post shown by her family explained a lot. her personal problems were massively misrepresented by the mass media and online trolls, and culminating in Caroline flacks hanging herself. That's a why it's so important for all of us to pull back when we find ourselves pulled into a online arguments. We can't see the damage it causes on the other side.

GLA

This faulty kindle changes your words , sorry ,LOL

GLA

Richard Griffiths has 39.635.738 shares in nanoco plc, maybe that doesn't indicate he's pumped tens of millions into nanoco.
He's just recently again pumped another £750.000 into it, Nanoco is currently valued at £82 million pounds .

It makes you wonder who's dishonest disrespectful and misleading here. How was is that now.

GLA

ddubya you keep stating that other posters are inferring all sorts of different things on this forum, this is only your interpretation of other people's post, as I've stated before everyone interprets post differently, but what you shouldn't do is start making personal negative in the middle of the night attacks on other posters, maybe you need some decent sleep to stop this ranting, it's good to have someone playing devils advocate here to balance things up a bit, but please less of the personal online attacks on this forum please, we've all witnessed what these things can do to others, as in Caroline flacks suicide by online bullies.

GLA

Another we point , if Richard Griffiths is consistently pumping in tens of millions into nanoco shares , and as we've all just recently seen him do just recently, do you not think Richard with a fortune of £240+ million wouldn't back nanoco all the way here. If nanoco need more funds, it's major shareholders will gladly help take this all the way to the end game, Richard Griffiths has shown his confidence in nanoco's current plans , and so will most of nanoco's shareholders.

GLA

ddubya do you actually think that nanoco's patent lawyers wouldn't have searched all Samsungs old new and probably pending patents, before launching a multi million dollar lawsuit. That's the first thing any sensible patent lawyers would do.
It's nonsensical to think otherwise, though mistakes do happen.

If Samsung found another way to make CFQD without breaching our CFQD patents , then that's fine and dandy, but to knowledge no one has bypassed nanoco's IP patented scaffolding to achieve that goal, we got there first, and that's what this is all about, only one person walked on the moon first, the rest are followers, if Samsung had any evidence to say otherwise , do you not think they would have presented it to nanoco from last march , of course they would have, that have nothing , just hot Korean secrets & lies to muddy the waters of the legal systems .

Samsung will probably make a carefully worded statement to cover their dirty tricks . So we will see what they come out with, though they have from last March to get there story straight, and that hasn't happened yet. You have to ask the question " WHY

DYOR, GLA

All this is really a forensic deciphering of information, and quite difficult to understand to most people, just when you think you've got a grasp of it , it then takes another confusing turn.

I'm with PPE on this one.
who developed. CFQD
Who patented CFQD
On what date was CFQD patented.

I could be wrong here but I'm quite confident it was nanoco.

So really all these other people/ companies who are using CFQD are infringing on our patents.

Samsung has been the leader I Believe in all these breeches of our patents.

As PPE SAYS all Samsung have to do is show a court or nanoco the patents that cover the technology that they are using to make CFQD, and as PPE SAYS , that's impossible, because only one party can own that patent or patents that covers our CFQD
technology.
Samsung have had a very long discussion with nanoco from last March I believe, about our IP PATENT thief, and to date they can't and haven't shown nanoco anything to defend themselves, which normally means a very large element of guilt here.
To me it seems quite straight forward, no patent, no ownership to manufacture CFQD TV,s,,, it should be that simple in front of the law, though Samsungs lawyers I'm sure can muddy the waters with anything, but what they can't change is the ownership of our CFQD patents, normally Samsung can delay these things for years stalling, though nanoco will strive to get this in front of a JUDGE AND JURY ASP, BUT WE HOLD THE TRUMP CARD HERE, IF we threaten to sell to another party Samsung can kiss goodbye to them CFQD patents, and that's were we have them by the #alls. And that's maybe why Samsung are on a very cautionary approach to nanoco regarding any heavy media rebuttals of our allegations.

I'm convinced the Chinese will make a strong play for our IP patents, that's there previous form in past IP technology fights.
They also won't get another opportunity to purchase these patents, it's now or never For the Chinese, what we have is exactly what they go for, a new leading technology development, that can change all TV,s to be the best in class. It's a no brainer, they are there ok as one of our suitors, and they don't like to loose, especially to South Koreans.

Our share price should steadily increase as the technology journalist crunch the numbers regarding our lawsuit.
I've never been this happy to hold my share position in my life. If we had a offer or £1.50p tomorrow I wouldn't be one bit surprised, just happy that Samsung or China have given nanoco it's fair reward for numerous years of R&D spending.

DYOR, and never buy on my say so. GLA

Ganters thank you kindly for them kind words sir.

GLA

Ganters these cases can take many many years, though it all depends on how determined the parties are at wanting a quick resolution, Apple and Samsung I think it took 7 years or so.
Our lawsuit could settle in weeks or months, if Samsung makes us a decent share or money offer for nanoco. That is the most likely outcome. Though anything can happen here.

GLA

Gonebroke that was a great piece of spotting and research to deliver that lawsuit claim even before we got that RNS, excellent sir.

GLA

If I were nanoco's advisor, I would be telling them to offer a decent all share offer of about 4/6 hundred million pounds , that would stop this serious problem for samsung in its tracks, I do believe that Samsung are right here in this bidding process, and probably with the highest offer/ bid / proposal, though nanoco wants there offer to reflect our full lawsuit claim, and that's why nanoco are publicly stating they are open to a resolution of all these matters, nanoco won't settle for a bid premium now, it's all about a full calculated total damages bid offer.

DYOR, GLA

ddubya if you say never would the smaller players pool there money and bid for nanoco then , you don't understand the stock markets unpredictability, anything can happen, even a billion pounds offer for nanoco, at the moment we think it most likely that Samsung will put the highest bid in, because it's got the most to loose. The other big TV players could easily put a offer in between 2 or 3 of them, in cash , though Samsung can make a all share £500+ million offer in with little effort.

DYOR, GLA

Shamil89 that final figure can only be guessed at, the punitive damages could run it hundreds of millions alone, and Samsung know that. Other big TV players have only one opportunity to really get one over on Samsung here, but that will cost them plenty, if the smaller players pool there money here, they could hammer Samsung's dominance of at least the American TV market.

GLA

ddubya. I have to magic words also two passports and a fast car.

GLA

Nanoco could very easily end up a X4 from the right now's 30p price, sell at a serious risk to your finances right now,
When we get the feed back from industry observers , the people in the know, our share price will react accordingly, I simple can't see this going to Samsung for less than £1 to £ 2 that would make no reasonable sense after apples damages and settlement, ours is actually a much stronger and more deliberate attempt to defraud nanoco.

All the above is without prejudice to Samsung.

GLA

Looking at the whole picture, I'm convinced that any offer would have to be pitched at well over a £1 even £2 if we're including A possible punitive damages element, now that would be in Samsungs shares of course with a little cash element,
This is a very serious risk all round now for samsung, I believe we already have there full attention now, and yes definitely they must be our strongest suitor now, it's all about our court case now, and what that could cost them in lost revenue and reputation. Now what price do they put on there Samsung name and reputation, I'll tell them £600 million pounds sterling payable in shares or cash.

GLA

30p to buy now, and we are still hugely undervalued .I won't stop saying this until we are over 50p+ and even that is really low considering the huge potential here.
GLA

Samsung will be running around like headless chickens because of our formal sales process, why ? Because all their competitors have the opportunity to put the boot into Samsung if they outbid Samsung for nanoco,
Whoever owns nanoco can decide if Samsung gets to use our patents for there CFQLED TV,s. You have Apple watching carefully on, LG, sony and all the other fighting back against Samsung TV manufacturers , thinking to themselves we can catch up on Samsung if we buy nanoco's patented estate , and even sue Samsung for hundreds of millions, and also get a court injunction to stop Samsung selling into America , one of the biggest selling areas for samsung.

This is why nanoco have a F.S.Process that will have Samsung making a much quicker decision around all this, and the fact that Samsung haven't responded to our lawsuit so far , maybe because they are already in our F.S.P. And need to behave themselves somewhat , or nanoco might show them the door. This is going to be interesting as it all unfolds.

GLA

A decent we write up in this artice, just that we bit more information .

https://www.kashishworld.com/blog/nanoco-technologies-sues-samsung-alleging-patent-infringement/

Let's hope the market wakes up to this incredible opportunity for nanoco's fortunes.

GLA