Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[barkbooo] 19/7/2024 08:38

BT lives happily ever after!

[paul planet earth1] 19/7/2024 06:51

$90m of that figure went to the legal funders!

$60m included an unapproved sale of over 100 patents to Samsung!

The 'happy clappy' institutional investors who praised the Board in their defence against the coup collected their pieces of gold and voted with their feet and left on mass!...showing as a consequence their true colours that they really never saw any viable future in Nanoco!

The firm is now c.90% owned by retail investor's who were the only ones who supported the over subscribed 37p cash placement needed to keep the lights on now worth a mere 16p!

ST Micro have walked and opportunities for using GEN 1 gone for good!

Board guidance on cash flow breakeven during next year.... now worthless!

The firms living off a diminishing cash reserve balance with a high monthly cash burn rate with no commercial deals in sight in the foreseeable future.

Meanwhile all trust and faith in BT and the Boards integrity has been shot to piece's over their dodgey insider dealings with LOAM and RG and blatant arrogant lying surrounding the Samsung settlement debacle!

The epitaph on this frims grave stone when Nanoco eventually runs out of cash, falls fowl and can't get a cash placement because retail investors won't support it, and the business eventually gets sold off for a pittance is that what looked promising at first turned out to be a total diaster due to a whole sorry saga of inept, incompetent, and ineffective leadership spanning more than 20 years!

The End!

[coiin stein] 19/7/2024 01:54

𝟒𝟎𝟎𝟎0782;

𝐈’9845;𝐥 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭, 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧9844;𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 …
𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐚9853; 𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐤9838;𝐧Ү37;

[coiin stein] 19/7/2024 01:53

𝐛𝐞𝐝𝐰9838;𝐭Ү53;𝐞𝐫;𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 ...𝐅𝐔;𝐂𝐊𝐖𝐈
19827;𝐒

[coiin stein] 19/7/2024 01:53

𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐧9840;𝐞Ү51;𝐬 ...

[coiin stein] 19/7/2024 01:52

𝐦𝐨𝐚𝐧9838;𝐫Ү52; ...

[coiin stein] 19/7/2024 01:52

𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐧9842;𝐧Ү40;,

[kooba] 18/7/2024 19:37

Yeah the halving of the share price tells you everyone was delighted in the result.. idiot.

[terrorwit] 18/7/2024 17:59

I think you'll find that only a tiny few don't regard the $150million outcome of the Samsung case as success delivered.

You only have to consider the overwhelming votes that reinstated the whole BoD and the workplace awards the company has won.

These reflect investments in the business that will pay back.

[paul planet earth1] 18/7/2024 09:41

Sp is down and rightly so making empty boasts of success but delivering 👌 zippo in commercial deals speaks volumes!

[shapes] 18/7/2024 06:47

Good point. I think they mean the companies that are paying them. I.e ST micro

[jfacwc] 17/7/2024 21:47

stooping a bit low to attack comments by Nigel Pickett.At least the share price reacted favourably, unlike comments here.

[rp] 17/7/2024 09:17

'I am immensely proud of our people and the work they deliver for customers'
What customers ??

[rads] 17/7/2024 08:18

I see we've got a "state of the art" second hand fab!

[paul planet earth1] 16/7/2024 22:01

Go for it TerrorTw@t I dare you.

Tell BT from me he is a lying toe rag that has no integrity and is incompetent to be a CEO!

[terrorwit] 16/7/2024 14:11

I think you're safe from a libel action Planet, as are most posters. Not because your accusations are right but because you're not worth suing.

[paul planet earth1] 16/7/2024 14:02

I think BT and the Board committed hari kari using Nanoco there is little if any reputational damage left given all their dodgey dealings with prefered shareholders and irksome RNS's over the Samsung settlement debacle that postings here would create leading to a court case for libel arising!

Personally Nanoco's mgt team are just inept, lack integrity, and this is demonstrated by their track record to date and general poor performance securing zero commetcial deals of any note!

See you in court...remember to bring your check book btw claiming false damages in US courts will be very expensive for you!

[paul planet earth1] 16/7/2024 13:58

Libel is a form of defamation expressed in written or published form, such as in newspapers, magazines, books, online posts, or broadcasts. It involves making false statements about an individual, business, or organization that harm their reputation. To be considered libel, the statement must be presented as a fact, not an opinion, and must be made with at least a degree of fault amounting to negligence or actual malice. The harmed party typically must prove that the statement was false, that it was made publicly, and that it caused damage to their reputation.

[paul planet earth1] 16/7/2024 13:56

Your a complete tw@t see you in court!

[terrorwit] 16/7/2024 13:28

You're at crossed purposes thicko. I'm referring to posters libeling Nanoco. not posters libeling each other.

[yasx] 16/7/2024 13:13

No you clown - you do not even understand the links you are providing.

It is not an action AGAINST an unknown publisher but an action BY an unidentifiable pseudonym.

In other words, nobody knows what or who Terrortit or PPE etc are - therefore their standing can’t be lowered as a result of comments anout them. They constitute random pseudonyms on a bulletin board.

Read the judgement of Eady J from years ago when one chap did what you suggested - he obtained (legally) details of posters from advfn using a NP - Eady J threw his case out, even though he was posting under his avtual name. Another chap posting not under his real identity did not even get that far for reasons I have explained to you.

Terrortit is not your real name and therefore there is nil prospect of libel. In any event, even if it were your real name, you have no standing anyway so causation does not arise even if a breach could be established.

Now, go and find yourself something better to do instead of exposing your foolishness on here.

[terrorwit] 16/7/2024 13:01

"It becomes apparent that he has no legal knowledge at all - you can’t libel an anonymous psydonym on a bulletin board. That is not how it works.

This guy is as thick as they come."

__________________________

WRONG! Legal action for libel and defamation is often taken against unknown publishers.

hTTtps://www.nathsolicitors.co.uk/defamation-actions-against-unknown-publishers/

[yasx] 15/7/2024 18:31

It becomes apparent that he has no legal knowledge at all - you can’t libel an anonymous psydonym on a bulletin board. That is not how it works.

This guy is as thick as they come.

[kooba] 15/7/2024 17:30

Hardly any need to undermine peoples investments here that seems well in hand by persistent disappointment in strategic delivery ..and as you always point out no one cares what i think anywaywhich is fine by me ..apart from you who are fixated..lmao. Just block me you if you don't like me questioning the narrative...simple even for you.Maybe look at the share price performance over just about any time frame (its down 87% since listing) to see how successful at creating shareholder value this company has been so far.. you are just in denial, a gullible fan boy.

[kooba] 15/7/2024 17:22

You find one example of libel or stfu. You just are a thick nobody who makes stuff up. Pathetic little creep.