We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nanoco Group Plc | LSE:NANO | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B01JLR99 | ORD 10P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.10 | 5.26% | 22.00 | 21.05 | 22.15 | 22.00 | 20.85 | 20.85 | 240,965 | 08:24:40 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coml Physical, Biologcl Resh | 5.62M | 11.09M | 0.0343 | 6.27 | 69.53M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
09/3/2017 19:35 | I am not questioning nano from a standpoint of trying to diminish them, but from a position of desperation having been invested in them over 3 years at a cost average of 75p, with absolutely no indication of when we can expect revenue. No one will be more pleased if as stated at the agm, we have revenue of 7-8 million y/e 31st july 2017. There are only so many times ME can stand up and tell us we will have revenue and production, only for it to not happen, before despondency and disbelief take hold. | notimpressed | |
09/3/2017 19:34 | Dow and Merck have not bought Nanoco, they have licensed elements of Nanoco's technology, not 500 patents en masse. I'm sure the bits they were interested in are very much worth their interest.It is almost unimaginable that every patent of the last 15 yrs is still regarded by Nanoco as current and viable technology. | onething | |
09/3/2017 19:30 | Onething, The patents were sufficient to attract Dow and Merck. I suggest you ask them if they have any value. Unless you have examined them yourself and come to your own conclsions? | kuss1 | |
09/3/2017 19:19 | So were Qd visions patents worth 70 million or not? Remember they were a failed commercial company. | kuss1 | |
09/3/2017 19:00 | Patents are only of value if they can be tied to commercial production, as yet we have no concrete evidence that nano have any sales. In the meantime Samsung are marching ahead in the cfqd arena, and if they are to be believed nanosys are involved with hisense, tcl and others in the supply of cfqd | notimpressed | |
09/3/2017 18:41 | Dr. Brian Gally, Nanoco's new Application Director is an interesting move. Nano will soon have Dow, Merck and Runcorn as production hubs. That 7.5 million revenue only about 6 weeks of production out of Manchester. The share price isn't tanking, despite what Slippy predicted. 'short of the century going to 10p'. That was more than 18 months ago. The Qdot industry continues apace. No-one yet can produce cad free apart from Samsung's internal production. To state that Dow may be producing for Hansol is nuts. Remember, QD vision had 180 patents when the Chinese were willing to pay 100 million for it. Nanosys have around 280 patents, Nano approaching 500 with its 15 year research history. That's why the price isn't moving. | kuss1 | |
09/3/2017 18:21 | Cadmium-Free Quantum Dots Upcoming restrictions on the use of cadmium (Cd) are affecting the QD display market. These include the anticipated end of an exemption that has allowed Cd in QDs in Europe, as well as stronger regulation of toxic substances in China. When asked in a 2016 survey whether they would pay more for a Cd-free QD TV, most consumers said yes. Manufacturers are therefore motivated to remove Cd from QDs, which were originally based on cadmium selenide (CdSe). The performance of Cd-free QDs has historically lagged that of CdSe-based QDs. However, materials suppliers have made significant advances in changing this equation. By tuning the wavelength at which the QDs emit light, it is possible to achieve a color gamut that covers 94% of the DCI-P3 specification, the standard for state-of-the-art displays. hxxp://blog.dowelect | ih_332411 | |
09/3/2017 17:49 | The board might be interested in the part of the Dow blog on CFQD. Seems bullish on the ROHS outcome. Sorry I can't copy it across now. | bagpuss67 | |
09/3/2017 16:39 | Syd...The Chinese will steal your IP !!..just ask BigE all about it.Why would Nanoco want a piece of the Chinese market? They still havent got a piece of any market ? hxxp://www.chinalawb | ih_169538 | |
09/3/2017 16:35 | andicapped, they can't dump them in one lot, it would absolutely trash the price, instead they drip feed into the market. As an examplea at roughly half a million a day it would take 38 days for RG to dispose of his holding. | notimpressed | |
09/3/2017 15:49 | hxxp://www.led-100.c | ih_332411 | |
09/3/2017 15:38 | That is, projected 2017 demand. | mwwh | |
09/3/2017 15:34 | I have long wondered if Dow gave up exclusivity so that they could produce Hansol QDs. Is this permitted under the new agreement? Nanosys PR implies that Nanosys and Hansol are capable of meeting most of the projected worldwide QD demand by themselves. This said, the notion that a larger investor is dumping shares conflicts with the fact that, as indicated by the daily charts, greater volume is occurring during price upswings. | mwwh | |
09/3/2017 15:12 | If I saw tens of millions of shares being dumped, I'd be concerned, but it isn't is it? If the II's thought this was a company going to the dogs, they'd be dumping shares big time, but I don't see that happening. | andycapped | |
09/3/2017 14:03 | wjs81, I can only comment on what is happening. Nothing to do with manipulation or negative sentiment, but given recent trading volumes and price reaction it points to a large holder divesting stock. the question you have to ask, is why? Given they have far more access to market sensitive data, and inside information, the prospects for a substantial recovery in the sp looks less and less likely. | notimpressed | |
09/3/2017 14:02 | In the last 3 years, Of what Mike has said in interview, video interview. What has materialised? Lets take the last year. We are close to finalising the deal with "the big S". Dow is operational? Will understand share holders are upset at lack of news. We will not need to raise any more cash... - Crunch time is now. The share price is the lowest. If they have not made sales they have no cash. No one will give them 9-12 Million for nothing. If they have made sales why can they not report they are now in production, no need to say who but what stops them from saying we are now in production. People are guessing that they are supplying TCL. All guess work because we have no information from the company. It is not little ol me making the share price drop, Its Mike, he is not doing his job. Big holders of the company are shorters. He is letting them WIN. Trust me nobody expects 34 or 25 or 20p until it happens. I never thought it would ever get to 38. More fool me. Shorters win again. | mrplay | |
09/3/2017 14:02 | The problem with a plateau at the lows (i.e. bumping along the bottom) is that the share price is showing no upward presssure, is therefor weak and is susceptible to a further fall. Bouncing repeatedly of the low is a much better sign. | onething | |
09/3/2017 13:44 | With the greatest of respect Mrplay, yourself and notimpressed seem intent on repeatedly regurgitating historic patterns. I think every person on this board fully acknowledges Nanoco's shortcomings to date in terms of communication, getting a product to market and potential cash flow timing issues. But future prosperity isn't going to be dictated by what happened last year or whether ME once lied. It's gonna be cold, hard figures of which we have no indication either way of what's coming next month or in the autumn. So I'm not sure it's adding much value to the thread by repeatedly posting unsubstantiated negative conjecture. The share price has had plenty of opportunity recently to dip well beneath 40 and it hasn't yet - why is it suddenly going to drop to 34? Shades of Slippy's insistence that we were heading down to 25, still waiting for that..... | wjs81 | |
09/3/2017 13:11 | Mrplay - so in answer to my question, that's a no then? | wjs81 | |
09/3/2017 12:21 | this is looking decidedly dodgy. and still we wait in silence. | notimpressed | |
09/3/2017 10:17 | Regarding TCL. perhaps they're dual sourcing, or perhaps Nanosys are able to produce a bit cheaper. Maybe the TV's will be made with cadmium free for one market and cadmium dots for another? I think we all know that Nanosys are much better at PR than Nanoco (not hard I know) and they're also partnered with 3M and I believe 25 ton processing facilities. Nanoco have far less, and although there is Dow, none of us here knows what is going on there. | andycapped | |
09/3/2017 10:09 | I think the IP of the company alone is worth more than the company value based on the present share price, so I'm not overly concerned. I can understand the concern of those who purchased shares at considerably higher values. The management team have not lived up to their promises of greater transparency of operations. Investors were assured of this upon the renegotiation of the Dow contracts, but apart from the initial licensing to Wah Hong and Merck, there's been very little information forthcoming. | andycapped | |
09/3/2017 09:43 | Wjs81 It is simple, Mike has lied. People have realised, the price has dropped. Nothing reassuring has been released. We know if they have not made sales they will not have cash to continue. No RNS to state any sales. So what option's do they have? loan or dilute the share price again and again. Because of no news. People do not want to be left with nothing. I NEED the share price to rise. I want it to. The shorters have destroyed so much. It is actually really depressing that they are allowed to get away with it.But without Mike actually doing what he says we are stuck in limbo and the price will always go down. | mrplay |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions