Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[andycapped] 13/11/2019 17:14

Regarding the 13 OEM's- working with OEM's and getting a supply contract are two individual things.

I don't doubt that companies were sampling the dots and/or film, but for reasons best known to them and Nanoco, they chose not to proceed with production.

Perhaps this was purely down to cost, or performance or a combination of the two. We've never been informed why, so have been left to speculate.

A lot was placed on the Apple contract, and although it was a big deal I always remained concerned that this seemed to be the only iron in the fire. If they'd had a few more they would not be in the pickle they're in now.

Share price has been steadily declining since the start of the week, might be bad news on the way, or not mean anything at all, after all it's been fluctuating between 9-15p since the big slide in June.

[botbot1202] 13/11/2019 14:40

Lots of interest..... everyone says share price is undervalued... so why oh why is the share price going down...???!!!???

[davidw1] 13/11/2019 13:06

NigWit. I am going to have to say that I agree the hypothesis that Apple has created vulnerability and made a low ball offer is entirely plausible. It has been on my mind too that the Board may have responded to Apple interest by engaging in discussion and going to the market. If that were right NANO has probably rejected a request for a period of exclusive negotiations in favour of going to market. Probably few other options for the Board.

Apple normally leaves suppliers to develop products independently but where there is unique competitive advantage for them (as is the case here) I feel sure they view the world differently.

It would be no surprise to later learn that Apple pulled the plug on the contract to lower share value in hope NANO would sell cheap and continue to ready the Runcorn plant for production readiness. Time to market is about the same so no loss. The risk is that others hold genuine interest and are willing to pay for it. Fingers crossed. We shall find out if anyone wants it by year end I imagine.

[bagpuss67] 13/11/2019 11:08

13 OEMs was it? The big S

[andycapped] 13/11/2019 10:51

Doesn't explain why the first displays promised Q1 2018 failed to materialise. They were delayed again and again, then the subject was dropped altogether as updates focused on the US 'partner'.

[nigwit] 13/11/2019 09:10

It's all very simple. Display sales were effected by the persistence of cadmium-based quantum dots, which have been researched and developed for much longer than more expensive indium-based alternatives.

(Think about it, there's far more cadmium on earth than there is indium.)

The company has not cloaked anything in NDA's. On the contrary, it has been completely up-front and explained how the relaxation of the RoHS ban on cadmium has been a impediment. The only cadmium-free QDs anyone is making are made by Hansol using both Samsung patents and a process patented by Nanosys*. Everyone else is using cadmium and, even so, sales are really only just beginning.

--------

Nanoco has not run out of money or support. The two largest shareholders have both increased their exposures since the Apple deal was cancelled in June. That tells me that they remain confident of the future. All the directors have added shares out of their own funds too.

-------

I think one hypothesis must be that Apple have sensed vulnerability, having first helped create it, and made a low ball take-out offer so the board and the major holders have gone to the market to see if they can flush out some better bids and get an auction going. Really, if this is right then, from our perspective, it could end on any price since, this time, discussions really will be in secret.

The only guide to valuation is that in 2016 Samsung bought 250 patents from QD Vision for $70 million.



If you want you can extrapolate this to a valuation for Nanoco's 750 patents today in 2019 and maybe factor in that DuPont, Apple and Merck, among others are already invested in the technology and may not want it to fall into certain hands.

FWIW I'd suggest that's a better approach than paying much attention to any vexed chancers on a bulletin board none of whom have got much right recently.




* Hansol is part-owned by one of the relatives of an owner of Samsung and Nanosys have received much of their development capital from Samsung as can be quickly confirmed using any search engine.

[hippo] 13/11/2019 07:33

All you will have here is a few Directors trying to secure there future, hoping thet can move with the IP. The Company is finished, Shareholders have already been stuffed, don't see that changing.....wishful thinking

[paul planet earth] 13/11/2019 07:16

Bagbus..so what's your interest in Nanoco are you an investor or simply shorting their shares?

[bagpuss67] 12/11/2019 19:21

PPE. There has never been a shortfall of possible applications. Nano management have spent a shedload of cash over 15 years trying to commercialise any of then and have run out of time and new money unfortunateky.

[paul planet earth] 12/11/2019 19:04

hxxps://www.medicaldevice-network.com/news/nanoco-develops-cancer-biomarkers/

A growing list of applications.

[andycapped] 11/11/2019 18:17

hxxps://www.meko.co.uk/article/display-daily/will-apple-start-making-displays

Interesting, would Apple want their own quantum dot production facility to compliment?

[ih_169538] 10/11/2019 21:44

We will see if your right or wrong soon ..QMC is webinaring a demo of their blockchain security ledger on the 19th who h could prove extremely valuable

[andycapped] 10/11/2019 20:49

One silver lining for me is that however grim things look in Nanoco land, I consider had I chanced my arm with QMC, things could be worse.

[ih_169538] 10/11/2019 17:07

Just helping the Nanoco investors who help QMC investors keep things straight on their message boards and not let pie in the sky comments stand.Those same investors never post here when that happens..wonder why.BTW it's ok to gamble what you can afford to loose ...most people dont invest that way though.Theres not a whole lot of investments where shareholders dont eventually get screwed and I truly am sorry if that has happened to some here who bought this and averaged down from over 100p.Its no different than the nano company I invested in..when there's " sustained " revenues and commercial sales then I will know their tech ( patents ) are worth something.Hope sll of you recover some of your losses through this buyout.

[wjs81] 10/11/2019 09:56

I think Crunch that you attach far more credibility to your own posts than most others would afford you. Not sure why you're still posting here, you're not invested and don't offer any insight beyond what others already know.

[andycapped] 10/11/2019 07:06

It’ll feel more like surgical spirit if Nanoco pull their usual party trick.

[botbot1202] 09/11/2019 20:34

Not feeling the positive Christmas spirit guys.!

[andycapped] 09/11/2019 19:32

£3 share price is optimistic, to say the least. If a few companies start bidding for the technology however, things could get interesting.

Perhaps the ii's have had enough of Nanoco management, but that doesn't mean the science is no good and without value. Heard all the gossip about consistency etc. Haven't seen evidence to back it up though- just hearsay.

[ih_169538] 09/11/2019 18:56

If the company was worth that kinda money in a buyout then funding should be no problem..apparently it is ..you can only go to the well so many times.Every PP has resulted in investors losing big so why would anyone else invest based on past performances.Much like QD Vision to much money wasted on things that never bore any fruit

[botbot1202] 09/11/2019 16:46

£3.00 minimum for the nice Green. Heist mad.. everyone should take this opportunity to think happy thoughts.!

[ih_169538] 09/11/2019 16:14

PPE..I've been around for a long time no need for a twin account.Case closed Sherlock

[bagpuss67] 09/11/2019 15:38

There is no "factory" in the sense you are thinking

Also if the IP has not been capable of commercialisation the scale of the market is less relevant. Others will exploit it

I do hope there is some competitive tension for whatever reason otherwise we are up the creek sans paddle.

PS IMHO you are deluded about the possible price. If we get 20p it will I think again IMHO be a very good outcome