Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[activmojo] 16/8/2019 15:55

TCL PR yesterday
hxxps://www.soundandvision.com/content/tcl-adds-quantum-dots-mini-leds-atmos-new-tvs

[mwwh] 16/8/2019 15:22

Point well made Howl01. The patent purchase was later. Sad to see newbie attacking Enteleon, who was one of the great voices of reason on this site for so long. I have also expressed concern over the lack of a backup plan, but I still retain some optimism. The future of Nanoco probably rests on the outcome of the ROHS ban. Every person in the world should be outraged if Cadmium is exempted once again. Hypocrisy may prove the death of one of the few truly green corporations.

[ghaon] 16/8/2019 14:39

Interesting re display technologies:

hxxps://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-closes-lcd-line-in-reported-move-to-oled-production

[activmojo] 16/8/2019 13:51

Wearables gain traction

[howl01] 16/8/2019 12:40

Good post ent - Kodak patents bought much more recently of course (but before the appearance of the 10 posts a day Nigel character)

[nigwit] 16/8/2019 11:31

Kodak filed for chapter 11 in January 2012 and Nanoco acquired their patents out of administration almost a year later in December 2012.

[roadster750] 16/8/2019 09:00

The gilded geek stated the value of nanocos patent portfolio to be whatever the share price was.

[andycapped] 16/8/2019 08:14

I expect Kodak had a lot of creditors to pay, unlike Nanoco who fortunately have no debt.

[jfacwc] 16/8/2019 07:45

Enteleon, reading the equivalent RNS from 2018, I see very little difference in ME comments. (Obviously no US customer this time...). You seem to have your own views, and try to phrase your comments just to scare others. Pretty common practice on the board, I know, but from you I would expect otherwise.

[nigwit] 16/8/2019 07:29

According to the 1 August RNS LOAM have 2.93% of the voting rights through financial instruments (CFDs). It’s not possible for these voting rights to be conveyed via a short hedging position, that would be like giving mice the keys to a cheese shop, so they must be long.

———;-

Of course it’s possible that the company won’t make enough sales and will fail. That fear is what’s keeping the share price so far below the value of the IP but what will happen to the share price if they do get sales?

There are two sides to this coin.


———;—

The historic value of the small number of Kodak Patents is not a guide to the value of 750 patents.

———;—

The redundancies reverse the recruitment of no-longer needed production staff and are sensible but sad.

———;-

It’s easy to speculate about what an announcement means by reading between the lines but rarely useful because they usually mean exactly what the lines actually say.

But if you want to speculate about what things really mean why not ask yourself what do LOAM know that you don’t?

[davidw1] 16/8/2019 07:07

A good sum up entelon. Having refocused away from Display a couple of years ago, to service Apple, we should not expect NANO to be close to securing deals let alone derive income from them. Should have had a Plan B.

Worrying times for NANO, so let’s pray for minor miracles needed to facilitate a change of fortune.

[enteleon] 16/8/2019 01:56

Most unusually, in the most recent RNS, ME does not mention any ongoing conversations with OEMs. I am more worried about Nano's financial vulnerability than at any time in its turbulent history.

Both LOAM and Richard Griffiths have Contract-for-Difference positions, most likely short instruments to hedge against their extensive long positions. Tenner, the CFO, was fairly emphatic some months ago about not counting on display revenues in the near future. The failure of the Apple Contract is obviously a massive tragedy and may prove terminal as far as Nano's commercial outlook is concerned. The loss of 20% of the highly educated specialist staff is deeply concerning.

As Tenner will know better than anyone, Nano has to demonstrate "going concern" financial status for the Company. Globally, we have entered a phase of deep uncertainty and volatility. Objectively, Nano has battened down the hatches and appears to be in "fighting for survival" mode, reducing operational costs knowing that a cash-raise without massive dilution looks frighteningly unlikely.

I wish everyone well here, but Nano's position looks very precarious indeed. Its prospects have always been highly speculative, but now look dangerous for any unhedged investor. And remember those Kodak patents ? They sold for very little indeed. A story of blighted promise. Pity, pity, pity.

[howl01] 15/8/2019 21:07

More irony?

[nigwit] 15/8/2019 21:03

I'm pleased I amuse you since I thought it hilarious when you got wiped out in less than 24 hours.

[howl01] 15/8/2019 20:54

I think they're hilarious - thankyou. Not as hilarious as your floundering though Nigel. Always can rely on your posts for a giggle.

[nigwit] 15/8/2019 20:39

Crow2/howl01

I'm sure you find your one-liners funny so I'll remind you of the recent occasion when you bought at 32p the day before Apple cancelled. I suspect you thought you'd talked the share price down sufficiently to venture a 10% trade and were about to change your views and pump it back but you over-estimated your powers and got caught out because the true reason the share price had dropped was on the research conducted by BlueFin that alerted some holders to Apple's predicament.

andycapped

Your point is legitimate and deserves a serious reply. I think that if the market doesn't value Nanoco correctly a predator will, especially given current sterling weakness. I expect it's being eyed up now and that's why LOAM and all the other institutions don't appear to be trimming their positions to fund a raise (which is what they did before).

The company will have £6m at 01 Jan 2020, can expect some R and D tax credit after then and perhaps some income. That will see it through to 2021, even without a significant new contract, which, very worst case, is enough time to shrink and retreat to the Manchester base to manage valuable licences for the IP.

So I think that, although your scenario is plausible in extremis, you are catastrophising.

[andycapped] 15/8/2019 20:01

I agree things would look different if the Apple contract had worked out, or Rohs, or the LG contract, or the Dow partnership, Samsung not to mention all the other display OEM's using Nanosys QD's rather than ours- Phillips, AUO, Hisense, TCL etc.etc. All companies mentioned by Nanoco management in their updates, but no products appear beyond protoypes.

So what now? I'm not pi55ing on anyone's head, I hold a significant stake in Nanoco, but I'm less hopeful of the companies prospects than any other time in the three years I've held, I think they've run out of wiggle room, because they're running out of cash at a time when the company market value is at rock bottom. To succeed they will have to really ace it in the next year- not sure the current management team have what it takes to do that.

[howl01] 15/8/2019 20:01

The living embodiment of irony. What a clip.

[nigwit] 15/8/2019 19:46

The whole situation would have looked completely different had Apple made a different choice or had RoHS not extended the exemption so to say I am wrong is far too simplistic.

Indeed the situation today is better than it was two years ago, before the last raise, after which the mCap tripled in just over a year. There were no visible contracts then and cash was draining.

But obviously the patent portfolio has value. Otherwise DuPont, Merck and Apple would have invented their own dots so cashflow is not the final determinant of value and the company will continue to be funded.

Do you ever listen to yourselves? What sort of individuals are you that you need to concern yourselves, in some cases using multiple identities, across different boards trying to rescue imaginary people you don't know and who never post to say they even exist, let alone to thank you, from my posts.

It's not even as if I express much of an opinion or predict the share price. Mostly all I try to do is respond to the hatred and post information I find so that any readers can draw their own conclusions.

As I said two days ago. I like Nanoco at the speculative end of a balanced portfolio and I don't suggest anyone goes all in.

So maybe instead of getting at me and other genuine holders you might try and understand our legitimate perspectives.

[bones698] 15/8/2019 19:16

And we all know patents and bits of paper mean sales and success.
Seriously nigwit have you listened to yourself and your comments. Sometimes tpu need to readjust and be able to see that your alone for a reason when everyone and everything is telling you your wrong. But maybe most importantly of all the share price doesn't lie and neither does the chart which shows a company failing and no deals means no business no matter how many bits of paper they have.

I can only class your comments as blind arrogance against a barrage of bad news and circumstances. Still it's your money to lose but don't expect sympathy when it happens as you have been warned

[andycapped] 15/8/2019 19:16

Unless they can translate the patented ideas into merchantable products, they'll remain concepts, and they will still run out of cash. So far we have healing lamps and plant grow lights- niche products and not nearly enough to keep the company going. Unless they get some displays out before the end of the year, and they'll need more than one or two, then I can't really see where the cash is going to flow from. Undoubtedly microled, sensor technology, medical imaging etc plus other irons in the fire have prospects, but short of a miracle turn around I can't see them bringing in significant revenue within the next 11-12 months, might be two years or more before any of those bring in money.

Now maybe someone like LOAM will cough up once again, but it'll come at a heck of a cost to existing holders.

Where do you think the cash is going to come from?

[nigwit] 15/8/2019 18:20

But there are 750 patents (with 100 added in the last year) and relationships with major corporations all of which is bankable value.

[andycapped] 15/8/2019 18:05

I'd say the lack of orders now or in the foreseeable future is suppressing the share price beyond any comments on here.

Once again where's the money going to come from, there are no orders?

[nigwit] 15/8/2019 17:47

Wrong again

Ferdinand Foch was a French General. He's famous for saying in 1911

"Les avions sont des jouets intéressants mais n'ont aucune utilité militaire"

or "Airplanes are interesting toys, but of no military value."

So Toggler was making an interesting metaphor although I can see how it would have flown over your head.

[activmojo] 15/8/2019 17:45

Same is happening over on LSE
Poster disagrees with CEO & CTO share sale conspiracy and is jumped on from great height.