The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Article from SAE saying Solid State batteries not widespread until mid 2030s. So plenty of time for Goliath
https://www.mobilityengineeringtech.com/component/content/article/ae/stories/news/49520?utm_source=Auto_News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20231204&oly_enc_id=7243J8832812G8B
I found the Golden Bridge Advisory leaflet when I returned from Scotland last night. I was not impressed.
The people listed are stated to be nominees. Nominee directors under British law do not have authority to take decisions on the company's behalf. Therefore, who will run the company? Is it Tarik Hamoodi, who was recently the sole director and shareholder of the dormant company Golden Bridge Advisory Ltd that was dissolved on 11th July 2023?
I do not want my investment and Nanoco's cash controlled by a smokey figure behind five stooges.
I shall vote my >200,000 shares with BT and the present board, who I feel have been unfairly vilified on LSE.
This should improve PHC's prospects in US market for seed coatings.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/10/epa-pesticide-toxic-seeds-lawsuit-environment-pollutionhttps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/10/epa-pesticide-toxic-seeds-lawsuit-environment-pollution
The Ars Tecnica article states that Amazon's QLED TVs will start shipping on October 27 using Samsung supplied QD screens. If that is the case I would expect Amazon to be aware of the Texas trial and have asked for assurances about the IP situation. Is this another reason for Samsung to settle whatever the trial outcome?
Sufficiency has concerned me, but I think Samsung can only argue that there is not sufficient detail in the patent for a person skilled in the art to make the process work if they admit that the know how was disclosed to them during co-operation with Nanoco. On the other hand if they claim that they developed the know how themselves, from the published patents, they are saying that a person skilled in the art can make the process work and so they destroy a sufficiency argument.
I suspect that, after using Parsortix in 1/1a part of a trial, the Pharma pretty much has to use it throughout the later stages, leading to very large income for Angle.
MrAdventurous
"Those guys can work wonders with a spanner Have a nice day."
I have found that a hammer works better. Engineers call it "Percussive maintenance"
Bilbo, I agree with you that it was stupid of the EU to put so many difficulties in the way of mutual trade, just as it was their stupid refusal to make any concessions to David Cameron that, in due course, precipitated the leave vote. "Non" is still the watchword for the bureaucrats.
I have not seen any comment on what the attitude of Samsung to settlement would be if the STM contract proceeds to production and the customer turns out to be Apple, as many assume. Could Samsung ignore such a large opportunity for their own products as well as selling to Apple? They would then have to take a license from Nanoco for that use and it would be easier to combine that with a settlement.
I have been skimming through a 2017 paper on US patent infringement remedies. Law may have changed since -
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44904.pdf
I found two interesting statements
1. Damages awarded by the Court may include costs. Would Nanoco's funder's share of the damages count as costs? I think so.
2."If a party can prove that the patented invention drives demand for the accused end product, it can rely on
the end product’s entire market value as the royalty base". The royalty base is the starting point for assessment of damages and in the Nanoco case their dots certainly drove demand for Samsungs high end TVs.
My son undertook a study into the utility of sending off a sample of an infection to be cultured in the lab (2-5 days wait). He found that the result made little difference to the decision to administer antibiotics - they had to give them straight away. The result was a huge cost to the NHS for culturing, with no positive effect on treatment. Perhaps the availability of Genedrive type tests for more general infections rather than gene types will encourage a reduction in cultured tests and save the NHS a great deal of money.
Samsung's research, as disclosed by the email, went back to before the grant of Nanoco's patents. Had Samsung thought them obvious, but cut across their own research knowledge, the obvious action would have been to oppose them during the patenting process before grant. They didn't, because at that time they did not think they were obvious.
A tailwind makes you fly faster, without any action by you. In this case the structural tailwind is mandated DMS in US and Europe. Tailwinds are good.
I have been looking at the GKN Hydrogen website. It was set up as a separate business from GKN Powders last year to exploit their metal hydride hydrogen storage. I was surprised to discover that they already have commercial units developed. This seems like an absolute game changer for hydrogen.
Just got this from Leading Edge. Full of corporate crap phrases, but the want eye tracking solution. SEE can provide that:-
Our client, a major financial services company are looking for innovators/experts who have solutions in behavioural science systems. They are keen to understand how multi-disciplinary financial insights can be captured. Going beyond financial data and enabling a consumer to have the self-awareness and knowledge, that they believe can enable a 360 degree view on customer perceptions. An example of this, but not limited to, may be interactive videos or eye tracking via gamified scenarios which can enable a deeper understanding of the human unconscious bias.
Rorkesdrift wrote: One question is what % of ProDox gets converted at tumour site. We know in mice it is very high 18x normal can be reached for same cardiac exposure.
Before the first dose one would expect FAP in the tumour andalso circulating widely in the blood. The first dose of ProDox would be released throughout the bloodstream as Dox, thus giving rise to some heart damage. However the next dose would be in an environment where it would only encounter FAP being released in and around the tumour. Therefore much lower dose reaching the heart.
i wonder if they have thought of using preparatory doses of affimers bound to something that inactivates FAP. That way the first dose of ProDox would not release Dox into blood and into sites distant from the tumour.
It occurs to me that any big pharma with a major drug going off patent should bang down $50m for an option on pro-drug affimers. Very cheap way to extend the patent for up to 20 years.
Someone posted earlier that Doxorubicin market size would be increased and therefore big pharma would be pleased. No they wouldn't. The entire market for Doxorubicin will increase because patients can tolerate bigger doses, but no doctor is going to start treatment with simple Doxorubicin because that will limit the pro drug dose if they decide to switch to the pro drug version. Simple Doxorubicin will be finished as a treatment. In my opinion Avacta will grab the entire Doxorubicin market.
https://www.ft.com/content/44b2426f-5bc6-4594-81b0-2d2e36aadc4e
They will need batteries!
I can't help thinking that the current Russia tension may expedite orders for nuclear detection equipment.