Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 22:13

Nigwit. The FRC will need to look at the facts of the directors sales

They will probably do nothing but its sufficiently suspicious for it to be investigated IMHO

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 22:05

The tax year runs to 5 April 2020

Why 2 weeks before 75% share crash

And if Richards underwriting sold and didn't declare it CR has a problem similar to my massive loss

[andycapped] 22/6/2019 21:29

I wonder if CR's share transfer to a company will permit him to write off any losses on the shares against tax.

[nigwit] 22/6/2019 21:26

I think he must be squirming after today’s press and I expect he has already spoken with the institutions. We don’t know what he knew though and it’s not only wrong to jump to conclusions but not sensible because it might prevent us looking for other reasons that may turn out to be accurate once we know all the circumstances.

I understand how he has become a hate figure but that doesn’t mean I agree with it and it doesn’t help us become better investors when we fail to consider all the potential explanations dispassionately.

[nobbygnome] 22/6/2019 21:23

Perhaps the company needed a tax loss....

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 21:15

Nigwit. Well this time ME is going to have to answer for his share sale and for his stewardship

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 21:13

Anyone know a potential explanation for Richards selling his shares to Richards Underwriting Ltd an insurance company two weeks before they became worth 25% of their value? Its an easy question. Does that company still own the shares?

Unfortunately for Dr Richards if that company did sell the shares he's been busted

[nigwit] 22/6/2019 20:49

I am not literally the only person jplay. It may look like that to you but that is because you only know about a very small subset of all the shareholders, the same few who tick up your rants here.

The fact is that, so far, the institutions have let Edelman keep his job so that can only mean they think he’s been the best person to do it.

I merely prefer their judgement to yours.

[davidw1] 22/6/2019 20:36

Yes that was also a danger signal
Bagpuss, although I might have been inclined to accept it was part of a tax avoidance scheme. It would be nice if the FCA could take a look, to provide reassurance to the markets that everything has been above board.

[mrplay] 22/6/2019 20:14

Mike sells 2 million shares last month today 8p a share. Coincidence I think not. The guy has always been in a rush to empty all the shares nanoco has given him. He needs to go. 15 years and achieved nothing but lies. Do not speak until you actual make a sale. Bored of the endless partnerships which lead to nothing, just silently disappear. Why are you literally the only person that can not see this. What is your connection to mike? did you fit a kitchen for him?

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 20:00

It most certainly will need to be answered I'm afraid

[nigwit] 22/6/2019 19:56

I don’t think that question is worth a serious reply Bagpuss. As I recall there weren’t many shares involved anyway. I’m almost sure there’s no conspiracy and that recent events, starting with Edelamn’s sale, are no more that a whopping great clusterduck

[howl01] 22/6/2019 19:46

I'd keep your head down Nigel

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 19:44

Nigwit. The question is whether it did sell its shares and didnt declare it. You suggest that's inconceivable. But don't explain any possible rationale for such a transaction.

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 18:56

David. Remmeber on 7 June Dr Richards also sold his shares. To an insurance company owned by him and his wife. I wonder what the conceivable rationale was for that?

This company will not report to the public this transaction in its accounts in which there is quite a lot going on until Nov next year

Very easy win for FCA to ask if in fact these shares were sold by Richards Underwriting Limited before the announcement of the cancelled contract two weeks later

[davidw1] 22/6/2019 17:07

Certainly is Volsung. Knew something did not add up when ME chose to sell two thirds of his shares to repay a loan. Suspect I and others hoped there was a rational explanation (and other directors bought)but another one to chalk up to experience. Shall not make same mistake again.

[sd_anon] 22/6/2019 15:18

P WHITE 73 makes an interesting point. IQE tanking on the same day. Apple is very unhappy with Trump's tariffs. The IQE chat board makes Interesting reading. Could Apple be leveraging their muscle in advance of G20 next week?

[activmojo] 22/6/2019 14:43

I posted a couple of weeks ago about Apple aquiring a company called Drive.ai
The main reason apparently was to aquire a team of autonomous vehicle experts.
Might have a bearing on resent developments. I think Apple are still in the autonomous tech. They aquire Drive ai on the 6th June.

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 14:28

I think you are correct. Hence the 4m is in the 6m expected at 31 Dec

[howl01] 22/6/2019 14:24

Yes - there's that as well bags but Nano received contract fees to year end up front didn't they? It's already banked so at least it can't be withheld.

[howl01] 22/6/2019 14:22

Of course the new facility can be used - but i think peoples idea that this consists of anything more than fairly rudimentary lab hardware is wrong. A bit like the Dow facility investment billions - ridiculous. Actual specific dedicated process hardware is minimal in both Dow and Nanoco cases.

[bagpuss67] 22/6/2019 14:17

I guess the other point that must be worth asking the company is whether the claw back provision for the investment against future sales has fallen away.

Or at to put it another way will they have to pay/ repay anything to the US Corp under any circumstances in future

[howl01] 22/6/2019 14:11

Bags - think they were always exploring other opportunities - they did say in the past that the material exclusivity clause was limited to a specific application. Outside of that specific then the field is presumably open but timing unlikely to be in Nano's favour. Maybe my preference for FLIR/ON will become a reality! ;)

[peterm10] 22/6/2019 14:03

A tiny dot of light in a dark tunnel. Carewear approved for usage under workers compensation insurance for pro athletes. Light patches sell at about 38 dollars each so got to be a dollar or two in each for Nano. Not making light of a grim picture. Until a day ago my biggest investment.