Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[syd7777] 10/4/2017 13:43

Current short position 4.12%,hope to see it drop lower.

[wileyc] 10/4/2017 09:19

hxxp://www.tcl.com/pages/productDetail/productDetail.html?uuid=75965fb5d1b54fc5bbf31bb38b69b1f3

hxxp://www.tcl.com/pages/productDetail/productDetail.html?uuid=5b9a4432f0c54944adf847551a60fbb6

TCL's X2 and X3 (links respectively) now on sale in China - fingers crossed they went with Wah Hong / Nanoco fine color film...


GLA

[robotface] 10/4/2017 06:55

LGs OLED hots upGoogle offers at least $880 million to LG display for OLED investment: Electronic Times

[kuss1] 10/4/2017 01:16

You still have to accept that quantum dots are a major new global technology. All the major OEM's are bringing out quantum dot displays. Nothing can really compete as Qdots merge with other tech going forward.

It's true that many tech co's face cash calls and dilution of shareholder value. The analogy with resource companies is correct in that respect. The appeal of Nano however was that its licensees would shoulder the capex. So Dow and Merck were to fund investment with Nano creaming off the royalties. To some extent that has happened with Dow funding some 60 million in expenditure and many million more in opex.

What is holding back Nano is the regulationary environment. Apart from Samsung none of the OEM's have any real expertise in Qdot tech so they are buying cheaply from Nanjing in China. They have no choice as Samsung is taking the market apart. Now it's extended to gaming monitors; next will be advertising display.

Regulation will tighten though. Not sure when but it will happen.

Samsung will progress to Qled emissive display in a few years.

Are Nano's Qdots good enough. No-one on these boards has a clue.

Nano had a profit warning in it's last results but it's not making a profit. The market reaction was predicable because profit is something it understands. But the institutions don't know about the science.

[stemis] 09/4/2017 21:29

I think most of what you are including as institutions are actually 'discretionary managed' private investors.

hxxp://www.nanocotechnologies.com/investor-relations/shareholder-services/shareholder-analysis

The only 'institutions' I can see are Baillie Gifford, GMT and L&G (~14%). Not even sure if they are all really institutions...

[andycapped] 09/4/2017 20:09

Hmmm, looked up shareholder analysis and it seems that was some way off. Funds hold almost fifty percent of the company.

[andycapped] 09/4/2017 18:02

Bit over a third in II hands isn't it? Still a big chunk to just let get away.

[stemis] 09/4/2017 13:21

Surely one of Nanoco's problems in any fund raising (should that be needed) is it's lack of a strong institutional shareholder base who it can go to and say, support a fund raising to protect your existing investment. That'll mean attracting new backers and probably a bigger discount on any placing. Technology companies are a bit like oil/commodity explorers. Even if they eventually hit the jackpot, private investors get diluted to almost nothing...

[lauders] 08/4/2017 01:30

Thank you for letting us know Bagpuss67. I have given up checking now as NANO's PR is useless & my holding has fortunately been cut to a minor quantity. Just enough to keep me "interested" but nothing else. The new blog reads more long term to me. Hardly inspires confidence that news is on its way.

It’s no secret quantum dots have a bright future—including applications in display, lighting, healthcare and more. But it’s becoming increasingly critical that quantum dot materials must be sustainable. Restrictions on the use of cadmium and other heavy metals in household electronics are forcing manufacturers to pivot to accommodate these important and necessary regulations. Regardless of the outcome of continued debate in the EU regarding the RoHS exemption (a move that would unnecessarily reintroduce cadmium into the EU market), it’s clear that sustainability is not just an option—it is an imperative.

From LCD to OLED to QLED, there’s a greater variety of display technology than ever before in the market. Competition is relentless, so despite its current dominant market share, LCD must continue to evolve and take full advantage of advances in technologies such as quantum dots. Price cutting and performance improvement are the norm, so manufacturers must distinguish themselves when it comes to quality as brilliance and clarity are improving across the board. This is where Nanoco’s quantum dot roadmap truly begins. Not only are our cadmium-free CFQD® quantum dots sustainable, they’re also closing the gap in picture quality between LCD and OLED technology.

It starts with displays and film. Quantum dot films increase in color gamut and brightness while getting thinner and less expensive. From here, quantum dots must migrate up the supply chain and integrate more closely with the panel to improve performance—first as color converters in color filters to improve brightness, efficiency, color gamut and viewing angle. Combine this with an improvement in black levels and LCD technology could easily exceed the performance of the more cost prohibitive OLED technology.

To deliver on this promise, quantum dots need to be both sustainable and manufacturable at large scale. Nanoco’s seeding technology provides such a path with a process that is inherently more stable and scalable. At a recent investor forum, Samsung shared that it’s able to produce 800 TVs worth of quantum dots with one 500 L reactor per day. Nanoco’s technology is already more productive than this. Over the last 18 months, we have increased the productivity of our process 5-10x and we expect more gains on the near horizon.

At Nanoco, we see a bright and colorful quantum dot future. That future is in part enabled by the ongoing massive investment in new LCD capacity. To realize this potential, materials must be sustainable and require manufacturing scale that’s commensurate with market scale. Nanoco’s cadmium-free CFQD® quantum dots and seeding technologies enable both. We know only sustainable quantum dots can realize and deliver upon the performance improvement roadmap of LCDs, today and into the future.

[bagpuss67] 07/4/2017 17:56

New blog on Web site.

[roadster750] 07/4/2017 17:53

Spotted them on shareprice site, theyve also popped up on lse, who knows what they're about at the mo,
I see JP morgan have reduced their short again on wednesday down to .76% now.

[balaura] 07/4/2017 17:45

What are these huge trades, roadster750, and where did you get them from?

[roadster750] 07/4/2017 17:38

More big delayed publication trades sneaking thru !

16:36:24 31.15625 400,000 NK
16:33:10 31.5 1,047,042 OK
10:08:16 31.5 1,700,000 OK

[andycapped] 07/4/2017 13:58

Perhaps the board can all waive their fees pending profits. That would certainly save a few quid.

[andycapped] 07/4/2017 13:58

Perhaps the board can all waive their fees pending profits. That would certainly save a few quid.

[bagpuss67] 07/4/2017 13:50

Stun. If Nano needs cash in the next year it will be facing insolvency and the share price will be irrelevant. They cannot borrow yet from a normal financial institution despite what some in here say and one would have to question whether existing equity would give them more. I think they might if there are some orders and sale but they haven't quite ramped up enough. But that would be definite not optional dilution.

[jfacwc] 07/4/2017 13:36

Bagpuss, I heard there was a BOD vacancy. Should we all put in a good word!

[stun12] 07/4/2017 13:36

These always seem to have been the kiss of death in my experience. The line of credit has usually been with rather spivvy operators who will manipulate the share price lower / preposition short if they think the line is going to be called on. I'd hope that NANO could find better arrangements if they're truly on the verge of greater things at that time.

[bagpuss67] 07/4/2017 12:49

It would provide a lot of comfort to have some sort of equity draw down facility such as QTM have just agreed available. As I read it the investor has to subscribe for stock (at a discount) when called by QTM up to the value of $5m in total. Would just give confidence regarding the runway and make this final negotiating phase before commercialisation easier for Nano to get through without being shafted.

[bagpuss67] 07/4/2017 08:59

Don't need cash in the bank. Just need a credible forecast that there is enough liquidity for 12 months. Can have an emphasis of matter as was in the interim note where there is uncertainty.

[stun12] 07/4/2017 08:55

I don't think it's compulsory, but I imagine there would be 'going concern' reservations made by the auditors.

[kenirogas] 07/4/2017 07:38

Hi all, still on the sidelines watching the show.
Just watched the Edi interview...sure ME says (couple of mins in) expecting commercial orders " in the next half" whereas in the webcast they implied/stated "during May".
Nice to hear cash burn vs cash holdings, though, giving about 15-16 months.
Q: does a fully listed company HAVE to have 12 months cash in the bank? So if no orders by July 31, what happens?
Atb

[kuss1] 07/4/2017 00:29

Onething, it's incorrect to say Nano have no revenue.

Nano have said the patents were a good purchase. They know more than we do.

So from that interview, Dow now fully commercial. Think it was the green Qdots holding them back.

[roadster750] 06/4/2017 23:08

as noted by andy c late reported trades sneaking under radar.

06-Apr-17 11:55:41 31.50 310,109Buy*


05-Apr-17 16:39:48 31.50 500,000Buy*



04-Apr-17 16:32:45 31.25 1,000,000Buy*

[roadster750] 06/4/2017 23:01

Edison interview