Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nanoco Group Plc | NANO | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.49 | 4.25% | 12.03 | 16:35:06 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11.26 | 11.26 | 12.00 | 12.03 | 11.54 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| TECHNOLOGY HARDWARE & EQUIPMENT |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 15/11/2024 17:38 by beeezzz All quiet on nano front.... |
Posted at 29/10/2024 15:01 by weatherman Check out the RNSs for DSM to see what Milkwood were trying to do there. They tried to take over that investment Trust and continue running it, while Downing were determined to close it. Milkwood did not succeed there, so their attention is towards NANO. They want to run it as an Investment Trust, possibly selling off the existing business. |
Posted at 28/10/2024 18:12 by weatherman So Milkwood have made their intentions plain, having failed at DSM, they want to turn NANO into an investment trust. |
Posted at 28/10/2024 07:07 by bones698 Lol infighting and power struggles . Now an attempt to turn it into a cash shell and get kick out the current board . Always said this was ran by charlatan's. Unable to create a viable business seeking dots nobody wants especially from nano . Going to meet a messy end soon share price likely to head back to 10p with all the politics involved and trying to get rid of the current bod that have done nothing |
Posted at 05/9/2024 13:01 by barkbooo Every single person I know involved with NANO are adamant - misleading information was the NANO strategy. |
Posted at 04/9/2024 05:21 by paul planet earth1 PWhite73"Sorry I don't see the black hole ahead you do. 99% of AIM/small cap companies would kill to swap places with NANO to have a cash balance of £19m and no debt." Nanoco has no customers and is burning through £7m cash a year with just £19m cash left...20 months cash runway at most..the development and roll out of new customer products can take years and there is a high risk that the unnamed Asian customer walks as well as GEN 2 materials requiring at least another 2 years until available.. What Nanoco should of done is mitigated this risk with ST Micro where if they wanted production to progress they shared that financial risk through a working capital and capex funding agreement until a point that manufacture reached an agreed volume and Nanoco repaid the loan and in the event that ST Micro were to cancel they would forfeit that loan.. Nanoco stupidity deployed all the funding itself with no contingency plans other than to cut costs which was very foolish and short sighted as ST Micro have now walked leaving Nanoco holding the baby. This clearly demonstrates BT and the Boards lack of commercial experience, poor business judgement, and amateur business strategy which is now shown to be inept and incompetent. No wonder he is leaving soon but not soon enough! |
Posted at 30/8/2024 16:53 by sikhthetech PPE,In answer to your question re settle before IP court, in your post of 6th Jan 2023, NANO!!! lol You were claiming Nano's patents were worth billions... so why would you then sell at 70p!!!! Caught out again....you and your blnx scaffolder mates are BS liars.. Paul Planet Earth6 Jan '23 - 13:00 - 28495 of 40232 Can anyone point to a court case, if any, where Samsung historically settled before an IP court case commenced? I can't think of one single occurrence in history..This has to be the first occasion reflecting the sheer overwhelming strength and weight of Nanoco's legal case for willfull infringement and the validity of their patent portfolio now worth billions! |
Posted at 10/8/2024 15:02 by kooba Hansol Chemical are producing CFQDs in large volumes and if it wasn't for the patents then Nanoco would have got nothing out of Samsung for using our IP. So saying patents aren't important is bizarre.Who knows who else STM are doing business with in their sensor endeavours ..they have never mentioned Nanoco as their source of sensor nano-materials...other companies are working on similar and next gen products too. But having your IP protected as much as possible is clearly important. |
Posted at 12/3/2024 07:07 by paul planet earth1 From the LSE BB the share buyback looks set for failure!TwoGood2Die Posts: 1,871 Price: 20.275 No Opinion RE: Share BuybackToday 07:01 Troublesome "If you look at the current spread 24p versus ask price 21p or 10% to 12% that's little incentive for investors to sell up! I would say the proposed share buyback has already failed regardless of the vote which will simply be a formality ie same 37% pushing it through but hardly any uptake as investors are not forced or induced to sell" TwoGood2Die Posts: 1,871 Price: 20.275 No Opinion RE: Share BuybackToday 06:45 Just to add... "My expectation is that the share buyback will fail to attract many sellers and a special dividend payment time for late June following the signing of the first commercial deal with STM seems the more likely outcome with the share buyback failing to achieve its original objectives reducing the share capital base and making Nanoco a more attractive takeover target" TwoGood2Die Posts: 1,871 Price: 20.275 No Opinion Share Buyback Today 06:42 "If you checked my original posts I cited that a share buyback was on the cards as part of a wider strategy and that was LOAM's future 'exit' strategy by reducing share capital making Nanoco a more enticing takeover target. At the time I suggested a £40m buy backbat 40p a share equating to 100m shares this would be priced above the 37p placement price in 2022 when the company needed operational funding. This I felt was a 'fair price' for the risks investors had faced and given that the share price itself had crashed 70% since the Feb 2023 Samsung settlement announcement was made on the $150m deal struck. It seems the Board have become too aggressive and priced the buyback at 24p having taken third party advice, which in my view the advice offered is fundamentally flawed as its always extremely important to take such matters into the context of the current situation and recent circumstances that Nanoco faced. A buyback at 24p if succesful plus a further £3m but with 90% of shares cancelled would at best lead to around 190m shares remaining in issue. 324m × 38.5% x 90% = 114.74m, post share price £33m/209m = 15.7p Note: 10% of shares won't be cancelled and still in effect counted as in issue. £3m spent on 'open market trading', £3m ÷ 15.7p = 19m x 90% = 17.9m. Total buyback = 114.74m + 17.9m = 132 64m 324m - 132.64m = 191m therefore £33m ÷ 191m implies a 'theoretical' share price of 17p where LOAM hopes Nanoco gets taken out at between 5 and 10x multiple or 85p minimum = 85p x 191m = £160m at 8.75% WACC = implied pre tax earnings = £14m but recent buyers have been using c.5% (or less) for a cash purchase implying earnings £8m which broadly will be inline with likely first Nanoco commercial deal at c.£12m recenues per year. The expectation is the Board believes investors will sell at 24p while current share price has risen 5% to 20p. My view the vote at the end of March will progress ( same 37% pushing it through, just a formality) however not many retail investors will sell and risk being 'out of the market' should positive news get released and then being unable to buy back in sub 24p... Ergo the 24p share buyback price is way too aggressively priced ie too low to induce many investors to sell up. And those that do sell were pribably inclined to anyway regardless of the price. Given the current share price and likely poor take up, evidenced by the number of frustrated posts here, I believe the take up will fall well short of 38.5% as there is no real financial incentive to do so as the buyback price is too low, and way below the 37p placement offer, to make it attractive enough! As always one to watch 'dodgey' LOAM RNS share holdings who would no doubt be buying up off loaded shares cheaply at 17p in the expectation of a future buy out by a third party. Again the Board have executed a poorly thought through plan with substandard third party advice who clearly wern't aware of the previous 37p" |
Posted at 10/2/2024 22:41 by barkbooo Frank - “ Colin:So stick to the other thread....” he can’t, nobody reads it! The authors contribution: “BROWNSTONE22 Dz30700 .. welcome to the thread. Please read the guidelines in the header and post 79, regarding the poster kooba. Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 100 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 23 Jan 2024 10:11 1 BROWNSTONE22 warranty .. please read post 79 Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 79 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 29 Oct 2023 21:39 14 3 BROWNSTONE22 ð��&ld Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 77 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 29 Oct 2023 20:37 1 3 BROWNSTONE22 Take a 72 hour break and come back better. Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 75 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 29 Oct 2023 15:23 3 2 BROWNSTONE22 andycapped, post 73 as per header Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 39 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 11 Oct 2023 12:04 1 BROWNSTONE22 Shapes, have placed your link in header. Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 17 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 04 Sep 2023 07:33 1 BROWNSTONE22 Activmojo, post 36921 your link added above. ADVFN - PROBLEMS - Post 4080 HELP BROWNSTONE22 15 Jun 2023 13:31 BROWNSTONE22 ? Nanoco/Dow - 2016 a transformational year for CFQD - Post 34082 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 12 May 2023 11:55 BROWNSTONE22 andycapped moderated Nanoco Technologies Ltd - Post 14 NANO Nanoco Group Plc BROWNSTONE22 08 May 2023 09:18 4 1 BROWNSTONE22 Quantum Leaper” So sinister - Brownstone could be BT? |
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
Hot Features
Premium
