Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[philkley] 13/3/2024 10:19

Where's the cake, clown?

[millwallfan] 13/3/2024 09:20

PPE is Jack Diddly’s brother 😂

[barkbooo] 13/3/2024 08:52

PPE - “The Board are lucky the firm isn't listed in the USA otherwise they, LOAM, and RG would be facing 'insider dealing' charges over the Samsung settlement debacle running the risk of heavy financial penalties and custodial sentences!”

Don’t rule it out!

[terrorwit] 13/3/2024 08:48

You moron!

If it wasn't for BT the business wouldn't even exist or would have had to raise many £millions.

[paul planet earth1] 13/3/2024 08:36

As for turning the business round BT has been at the helm for 5 years paid £325k a year plus bonuses and to date delivered..Jack Squat!

[paul planet earth1] 13/3/2024 08:34

The Board are lucky the firm isn't listed in the USA otherwise they, LOAM, and RG would be facing 'insider dealing' charges over the Samsung settlement debacle running the risk of heavy financial penalties and custodial sentences!

[chilom] 13/3/2024 08:17

If Samsung is indeed the cherry,where is the cake you utter clown?

[terrorwit] 13/3/2024 07:55

You are ranting

You were told the Samsung case was the cherry on the cake. No-one ever told you to invest solely in its outcome. The organic business has always been the focus of the company. This was 100% clearly stated.

The tender offer of 4p above the current share price is available only to holders, that's the cherry. If it was given in a dividend it would just come straight off the share price and get absorbed into the market to no-one's benefit.

The only problem with this share is that a bunch of morons got hold of the narrative and convinced themselves Nanoco would win $billions in court. This always looked ridiculous to anyone with the slightest knowledge of legal disputes.

Now you're paying the inevitable price of your own greed, hubris and gullibility. The BoD have turned the business around and have never mislead you. You mislead yourselves.

[jph] 13/3/2024 05:49

I am not ranting.However, you are a to$$er who changes ID's to further your own agenda, purports to be far more knowledgeable, and denigrates others using foul language on a public forum.Say what you will, but the way this has been and is being handled by the board is disingenuous at best, and in my opinion, is not in the best interests of the majority of investors, who are individuals with their holdings sheltered from tax.

[pj84] 12/3/2024 22:40

Ok I have now reread paragraph 5.

If everyone takes up their 38.5% entitlement then everyone will still own the same percentage after the tender.

Someone who tenders more than there 38.5% will, if any excess is accepted be diluted
but so will someone who tenders their full 38.5% entitlement if for example only 30% of eligible shares are tendered.

If someone tenders less than their entitlement say 30% but only 25% of eligible shares are tendered they will still be diluted.

[pj84] 12/3/2024 22:23

Dessaix paragraph 6 is fairly straightforward.

LOAM for example is the largest individual shareholder with 16.62% and if they take up their full entitlement under the tender offer other things being equal they should still have broadly the same percentage holding in the reduced number of shares but if they decide not to take up their entitlement they would then have around 24% of the reduced holdings depending on the proportion of other shareholders exercising their entitlement.

There is nothing to suggest that might happen, but it is being pointed out as a risk that existing shareholders exercising their entitlement MIGHT be diluted.

Paragraph 5 is also highlighting similar risks that MIGHT happen but there is no suggestion they will and after a quick first read I think I would need to reread para 5 a few more times to get the full gist of it.

[dessaix] 12/3/2024 21:05

Could someone please explain paragraphs 5 and 6 in part iii on page 18 of the circular. Thanks

[beeezzz] 12/3/2024 20:43

Well those that participated in 37p fundraising must well happy, that was based on major deals which have not been forthcoming, so why should anyone believe them now.

No way will we hear of any deals before this has been settled one way or anther.

[swiftnick] 12/3/2024 18:44

Thanks for the link PJ84.

[pj84] 12/3/2024 18:22

swiftnick all the details are in the 57 page circular

Having looked at it yesterday, like greedfear I decided to sell all my holding at just under 20.3p and will now wait to see what happens once the tender is complete but I am not optimistic that buying any now is an opportunity. Accept others might be more bullish on the post tender prospects.

[beeezzz] 12/3/2024 17:23

Longer they keep money on high interest the better for those running nano...

It seems pretty obvious this is not going to pass, which they already planned for..

Personally the whole thing stinks to high heaven, why it took them a year to come up with this dastardly plan is beyond me...

Nobody in their right mind is going to sell at 24p if they paid considerably more..unless this is last throw of the dice for companies future.

[swiftnick] 12/3/2024 17:10

Thanks Noccer, reading the announcement again I think you're right. I can't find a definition of Eligible Shareholder in the announcement, but I would make an educated guess that it probably means Shareholders not resident in the excluded countries of "Australia, Canada, Japan, and the Republic of South Africa and any country, region or territory which is the subject of any comprehensive Sanctions".

[barkbooo] 12/3/2024 16:10

JPH - you have my thumbs up there.

[noccer] 12/3/2024 16:09

Swiftnick - it says "All Eligible Shareholders on the Register of Members at 6.00 p.m. on 9 April 2024 are entitled ..."

Katsy - My first thought too - they don't expect good news between now and 9th April as an uplift would scupper their plans. Next thought was whether there might be news immediately after the deadline - which would be tricky too. Seems odd that they didn't opt to buy back a smaller proportion at a higher price. Maybe they are confident that they don't stand a chance of getting any orders in the near future. Certainly avoiding commercial success does seem to be one of their strengths.

[jph] 12/3/2024 16:04

Returning "your cash" should have been a straight dividend.Anything else is basically a scam. "Your Cash" (which is NOT between 33 and 40 million - it is 33 million) is being spent with "clever people" and NOT being returned.Buy backs, from others I have seen, do nothing for the share price.Nothing of value announced in the last 12 months.Samsung settled well BELOW Edison's "low" estimate.Inept is being almost complementary.

[jph] 12/3/2024 15:57

TerrorWit.To$$er.Either paid to do this Sh1t or not taking his medication.Arrived 4th March - pontificating like he is the font of all knowledge.Believe at your peril.