The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGpTE7GBP90
Advantama showing their ROHS compliant Cadmium Free Perovskite QDs.
They claim their QD's are better than Nanosys and working with their customers they 'hope' to ship starting next year 2020.
Really clarifies the slow time to market working with OEMs - 'the display industry is a fast-moving industry and in the end the reliability expectations from the display industries are really high so I think from first Test TV to the final commercial product it's a long way and I think that's what most companies are struggling with'
Aside from the ROHS exemption I think this has been the main stumbling block for Nanoco.
Also talks about the slow progress in the development for printed solar cells using QD's - 'market-wise' due to high cost and so cheap 'silicon based' solar cells.
https://www.google.com/search?fs&q=Silence+Therapeutics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Sorry didn't know you had to subscribe. If you click the link from google search of 'Silence Therapeutics' - the FT link appears in Top Stories and when clicked you are able to view articles without the requested subscription requirement.
https://www.ft.com/content/d37a236e-a940-11e9-984c-fac8325aaa04
Hi gjones90705,
Thanks for the compliment but I don't regard myself as having any special knowledge except what I find in research (I know there are far more knowledgeable holders than me on here).
I find Nanoco interesting, the potential is there but either bad luck or imv poor management/strategy (over the years), I feel has got them to where they are now (sp wise) albeit hats off to ME for the US customer.
I don't currently have shares in Nanoco but did have up until a few months back which I held for over a year.
The sp will hover around these levels (12-15p) in my view until any news is released. I like Brian Tanner and my hope is he will be the catalyst in Nanoco's change in fortunes and they are able to capitalise on the strength of IP in regards the US partner. I appreciate this board in that both views are hopefully respected. I accept I may have confirmation bias atm in my faith in ME maybe unfairly (I don't know is personal circumstances).
ATB
https://youtu.be/oEgzGOpkXAY?t=3078
Amerloque, I see Plessey - on their Linkedin page - have linked to the article I posted so i guess it must be accurate. https://www.linkedin.com/company/plessey-semiconductors.
I find it interesting Nanosys talk about MicroLED and make reference to the different approach (compared to inkjet printing) needed when you want to go sub 5 microns i.e. photo lithography/photoresist printing.
Talking about MicroLED - 'There are a lot of problems with getting these things to manufacturing scale that are complex particularly an RGB micro LED array so we're working with several partners today that are trying to make all blue micro LED arrays and then use this color conversion technology to convert certain pixels to red or green'
Their table shows the advantages of both printing techniques - Inkjek & Photoresist.
Maybe when Plessey (or the article) says 'However, if Micro LED pixels are smaller than 5µm, current QD materials will not be able to apply, it is in the RGB process where more R&D needs to be done. Nanosys say they have demonstrated a µLED (microLED) photo lithography cadmium free color conversion layer at IMID.
Interesting they also say 2-4 micron pixel may be required for VR/AR devices (not possible with Inkjet printing).
I think trust is still an issue with the Ceo. Somebody on the other board mentioned he thought from memory at the time his personal loan was near £500k. I don't know how he could know this? Anyone else remember or have a link? Maybe bs but if true that would leave >£400k over from sale of shares yet he only purchased £25k at recent director dealings. I note he transferred £27k to charity during the sale which is commendable but why not purchase more? I know I'm not the only one it has irked and these things can be looked upon in two lights - positive and negative depending on your point of view. It all in the air just now with no news forthcoming which is causing the sp to fluctuate imv.
https://www.powersystemsdesign.com/articles/psdcast-the-worlds-first-quantum-dot-led/67/14640
Interesting podcast with Dr. Juanita Kurtin, Director of Materials Research at OSRAM Opto Semiconductors.
Q: Since QDs contain Cadmium what's OSRAMs plan to get around the ROHS directive or is your solution already compliant?
A: The solution is compliant. Our QD product has less than 100ppm of Cadmium which is an incredibly tiny amount. We are just basically limiting the amount of QD we add to the packages in order to stay below that 100ppm threshold. All of these products are fully compliant and fully tested etc. The material that we are using does have Cadmium because that is the only material that works in this environment but we are very actively testing other kinds of materials that don't contain Cadmium in order to replicate the same kind of behaviour with Cadmium-free semi-conductors. We recently received a grant from the GOE to work in collaboration with a partner at Columbia University and we'll be using that grant to further investigate Cad-free alternatives to our current materials.
More research needed for CFQD in this application it seems. Also talks about different colour emission from QD size.
https://youtu.be/oEgzGOpkXAY?t=1331
Here's Nanosys explanation of the ROHS exemption.
'So they could do three things - they could extend it as it is, they could extend it but lower the permissible limit or they could completely eliminate the exemption and if they do that then it would eventually go back to the pre-exemption level which is 100 ppm of Cadmium - but there's a grace period, so even if they say in November they decided to cancel this exemption it would still last until middle of 2021 that products could be sold'
Interesting at their 2019 Investor Conference they say they are a profitable company as of the second half of 2019. Must be lots spent on R&D, maybe.
I'm not a nano-physicist amerloque so I can only go by the article written. I know size of QDs affect their attributes/properties - tuning the size it is possible to control the color of light emitted. Or maybe they can go below 5µm on individual colour but issue is in RGB process, i don't know (just guessing)? I would guess the question was asked during presentation?
Still think MicroLED will be expensive though atm.
Interesting current limitations in using quantum dots smaller than 5µm?
https://www.ledinside.com/news/2019/7/microledforum_2019_highlights_2
'Plessey shared the features of GaN-on-Si Micro LED, underlining that compared to GaN on sapphire wafers, GaN on Si wafers can be thinner and the substrate can be removed more easily which are crucial for Micro LED manufacture. Moreover, its efficiency performance is better even when chips are smaller.
Plessey uses quantum dots (QD) to achieve full color combining blue source with red and green QDs. However, if Micro LED pixels are smaller than 5µm, current QD materials will not be able to apply. During the presentation, Dr. WeiSin Tan, Director of Epitaxy and Advanced Product Development, also shared the latest progress of Plessey. Its 0.7-inch Micro LED display can achieve a resolution of 1080*1920 with a pixel pitch of only 8µm.'
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PqMQobkUhg
Interesting demo from Plessey focusing on AR/VR micro display market. Their ability to create a non-transfer process in the manufacture of micro-leds seems to be their USP. Their targeting and have OEM customers - one of them in Vuzix. Their leadership is in the ability to go 'sub 10 micron' in the pixel design. 2million pixels in 0.7" in 1080p @ 3000dppi. Vuzix say next gen should be significantly brighter than the blade is currently - no mention of nits brightness. Their blade glasses are blooming expensive atm and I don't see price going down until at least Plessey can manufacture an RGB display on 1 die. Small volume still imo as the tech still needs more development + How many quantum dots do they need for such a tiny display?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=52ogQS6QKxc
Then check out Plessey's competitor JBD also @ SID.
They claim everything Plessey say they are supposed to be the market leaders for? Strange?
Using monolithic technology (like Plessey) and have 'No phospher, no pick&place, no mass transfer, no quantum dots needed' with top-secret customers? All done using semi-conductor technology.
Lots of maybe's. It's all a gamble. Lead-in time for new applications, testing, further delays, dilution risk, trust? Too much dependence on the US partner for revenues (90%). Needs clarity on short-term revenue. Will come good eventually imo but lots of uncertainty ATM. Don't expect display to do much to be honest. AUO at SID didn't even mention quantum dot in their booth unless I missed it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4aTieT-AUY
And even the big boys get it wrong sometimes.
https://www.ft.com/content/65cfe4ec-a144-11e9-974c-ad1c6ab5efd1
J16, I don't think the board sold then bought as you say. My understanding looking at previous Director/PDMR Shareholdings, is the board had been buying up until 10th April 19' - last buy from Non_Exec director Chris Batterham (125,000 @ 47.354p).
ME sold 45,797 @ 53.5p on 18 April then a further 2,000000 @ 45.7p (average) on 2nd May. The reason being to pay for a personal loan - it must have been some loan! Also NP sold 227,653 @49.6p (average). Don't know why.
The rest of the board were obviously confident the US partner project would continue. Industry newsflow suggests the US partner may have opted for an alternative architecture for the component potentially deploying quantum dots. Think Peel Hunt reissued 'Not rated' rating and someone said IC had a sell rating on Friday although I don't subscribe. I expect a holdings RNS this week from LOAM reducing their CFD holdings. Good to see board buying at these levels but I would argue expected - ME found 25k lying around (hope it's not another loan). 9p too low but without news could hover between 12-15p imo.
I think Nano's IP is in the scalability of it's production in CFQD as noted by ME in video "Nanocos expertise and IP specifically in the manufacture, scale up and volume in production of QDs". If the IP is in production and not in the dots themselves then why are Nanosys so dominant in display? I don't think it's how fast or how many can be produced but the unique properties of the dots (the tech). Delay in ROHS ban or loop-holes etc Nanosys claim to have cadmium free dots. It's not quantity, it's quality. Apple hold the IP and Nanoco are just supplying the dots to their spec (supplier). I don't buy his reasoning for delay in display.
I like Brian Tenner and think Nano will be fine in long term (always been jam tomorrow) but short-term is my only concern. He says in Oct 18
"we finished the year with 10.7 million of cash which is adequate to get us through to commercial production volumes in the first half of FY 20" - with the US contract cancelled, the risk is no significant contracts between now and then. ME said in Apr 19' - 90% of Nanocos revenue provided by US customer. What is the lead time for product testing should another company require Nanos dots? Would be good if Nano could clarify and communicate to the market.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-AR1NLZYOI
You could be right. It's all a gamble. Prudential selling other II buying. I won't be buying until the state of play has been cleared up. Maybe then it will be too late. Who knows. No inference to the character of ME intended btw - It just irks when he sells every year. And wild predictions/speculation surely is what caused the bubble 2012-13. Need more research or contract news to back up rhetoric imo. Good luck anyway.
Looks like the ramping crew taken over the board I see. Many new faces i see or wild predictions from vested interest parties. Many not seen on the board before the drop. lol.
The directors should really be buying at these levels. Where's that RNS?
I think the best RNS would be ME going and being replaced with a business minded individual.
'Michael Edelman, the chief executive, earned £941,000 when he offloaded 2 million shares last month' https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/analysts-join-dots-to-name-apple-as-costly-nanoco-contract-loss-0cm9d9vt6
How much would that have been had he waited a few weeks? He's got some business acumen, I'll give him that.
And how many millions have been spent on display? Nanosys have near 100% market share. I expect it may rise of hover further but it's all based on sentiment (ramping) atm.
The scientists are top-notch at Nanoco but technology is moving fast and while they may have come up with new innovations whose to say all the patents hold value and when will it be realised in a commercial sense? Lots of unknowns still - further dilution if/when ? Fun watching though :)
Sold out here a few months back when speculation on the board of placing before 25 Jan RNS. Not sure whether to get back in. I just knew Michael Edelman would have his annual sell-off which bothers me no end. Now with US contract loss, feeling less confident in Nanoco's market esp in display where Nanosys say they have close to 100% market share. Don't expect Nano to go out of business. Just feel for LTH and hope tech will find other markets and customers in the short term - needs clarity on future revenue streams.
Some wild ramping/speculation of takeover and such on board today. Will watch on the side-lines and wait to see if/when day traders close at end of play. Too many unknowns just now - if/when they decide to raise money and at what level?
Advise new investors to research before jumping in on the hype! GLA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oERnxm4-ko