Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

[mrplay] 07/11/2016 09:07

Bagpuss sold all his shares remember. He is trying to drum down the price to buy back lower. He love nano thats why he posts. He just got phuqed like the rest of us and trying to lower his average.

[howl01] 07/11/2016 09:06

Dow made a $300k royalty payment to nanoco for quarter ending June '16 - attributed to increased sampling activity. Nanoco have 2 weekly rotation of staff working with Wah Hong and upwards through their supply chain. Merck trialling technology, sampling clients and anticipating orders for which they are due to announce their own production facilities. All TV manufacturers developing QD augmented panels with understandable preference for cadmium free qds including the Chinese. Nanoco remains best potential investment in qd tech - all for the reasons cited - highest capacity, composition, reproducibility. In <12 months you have gone from 0->$100k/month, WH produced qdef, 500kg production capacity ex Runcorn (at effectively no capital outlay I might add) and Merck licensing agreement /possible production. Speculation can be fun but facts speak for themselves....

[kuss1] 07/11/2016 09:01

ME will be there and he'll be at the AGM .

Still waiting for those two board replacements you promised slip and the large institutional selling.

ME also concluded the Wah Hong and Merck deals.

Bagpuss, I find it odd that you are treating Dow like a small cap player with incompetent management. OK they've been slow, or the industry has been slow to take up the tech, but they are not fools as you suggest. And they haven't given up on Qdots, though it seems you have..

[mr.oz] 07/11/2016 08:59

SSW -> asked ADVFN to investigate your claims. Thanks

[slipperysidewinder] 07/11/2016 08:59

Kuss

If they dont keep up the illusion it is game over. I am with Bagpuss.

What was previously produced was just not up to the job. The company is noe playing catch up behind the all is well facade.

Just look at the chart. It is like a catastrophe.

[slipperysidewinder] 07/11/2016 08:55

Bagpuss

I think your rationale is bang on the button. It will all come out in the wash. I am of the view ME will not be at the helm much longer.

[kuss1] 07/11/2016 08:54

OK so why did they just reappoint a business manager? If there's no future as you say?

I thought their factory was completed in Jan of 2016, that's not 2013.

[fil340] 07/11/2016 08:53

SSW: It's usual to pay suppliers 30 days after delivery & 60 days is not unheard of. Cash burn is always a concern with pre-revenue companies like Nanoco, and if a cash call is needed I would have expected to hear of it already; nb needing more cash is marked up as elevated risk in the 2016 annual report. Given cash concerns it would be negligent of the board to ignore the issue of redunancies so I would expect those plans to be in place. If redundancies are going to be proceeding then no doubt it will be with respect to some research staff as the business focus is now coming online ie production & revenue. This is, frankly, fine, as right at the minute I couldn't give a monkey's about solar or bio, or lighting either. I am skeptical of product sitting on shelves as they are making samples to order.

To sum: all in all the stuff you have reported smacks of low-level insider intelligence.

[bagpuss67] 07/11/2016 08:53

When we're we first told that product based on Nano tech was being "sampled"?

[bagpuss67] 07/11/2016 08:49

They have had a business manager for years. I'm amazed that you defend the progress Dow have made since they licenced this tech in 2013.

[kuss1] 07/11/2016 08:41

Bagpuss67,

If Dow haven't managed to commercialise why have they just appointed a business manager for Qdots? Why are trevista Qdots still advertised on the Dow site? Why are royalties being paid from Dow?

If Nano's dots are not saleable why did Merck and Wah Hong pay upfront licensing fees?

Regarding QTMM, their share price is worst than Nano's. They seem to be in the eternal sampling world as well. But they don't have Dow, Merch and Wah Hong shouldering the burden.

Science moves ahead. Hansol and Samsung seem to have made a fist of the tech with batch production, see if Dow/Merck and Nano can is all...

[slipperysidewinder] 07/11/2016 08:33

Just one of many and i have heavily edited the contents of the more damning information.

If Nanoco want to sue me they are welcome. I may get my chance to get some answers to some extremely probing questions.

[bagpuss67] 07/11/2016 08:24

Fil. Look at the earlier post about the Dow time lines. Dow have not been able to commercialise the product. Maybe the original batch tech just wasn't good enough. And Nano have been fighting a rear guard action to evolve the tech before they run out of cash and sharholder goodwill

[slipperysidewinder] 07/11/2016 08:21

Fil

The following email was sent to me at the beginning of October.

Bio and solar are nowhere....OSRAM cease relationship with Nano....not reported???.....yet

[bagpuss67] 07/11/2016 08:12

What is going to stop this getting to 40p or below..loads of possible good stuff to happen but feels like it could be months before anything tangible.

[slipperysidewinder] 07/11/2016 07:17

Well said ih 169. At last we have a modicum of reason amongst the hoards of lemming induced rampers hurling themselves off the Nanoco cliff face.

Of course there are otherplayers out there. Producing cad free dots if a higher cslibre and at far cheaper cost than the Runcorn outfit.

With the world in chaos and no positive news in sight it is inevitable that Nanoco will plummet further. Eroding shareholdet valuve to the enth degree.

I told you it would happen and you all laughed.

Well your not laughing now.

[ih_169774] 07/11/2016 02:38

Nanoco isn't the only game in town. Stop misleading investors on this board with your propaganda.

Quantum Materials Corp., Quantum Dots Player, CEO Interview
Nov. 4.16 | About: Quantum Materials (QTMM) Get Alerts
Peter Epstein Peter EpsteinFollow(1,094 followers)
Deep value, long only, CFA, contrarian
Send Message|Epstein Research
Summary

Offering similar picture quality at far cheaper price points then industry leading OLED TVs, quantum dots are the next BIG thing in display technology.

The market for quantum dots is wide open, companies with strong, innovative technology platforms are well placed to benefit from surging demand.

Few can manufacture high-quality quantum dots at industrial-scale. Among those who can, wholesale pricing varies. New entrants that can provide premium quantum dots at commercial-scale and low prices win.

Quantum Materials Corp ("QMC") (OTC: OTCQB:QTMM) is neck-deep into the fascinating world of quantum dot ("QD") technology. Haven't heard of QDs? You will be hearing a lot more about them soon enough, as they're increasingly embedded into a new generation of LCD TVs. Like lithium-ion batteries, QD technology has been around for decades, but only now is starting to make serious inroads into a widening range of end-uses, most notably display monitors.

When QDs are integrated into LCDs, they enable a much more vibrant color spectrum, in part by expanding the gamut of colors perceivable by the human eye. Key to the story is that QD-embedded LCDs compare very favorably to OLED TVs, currently the top-tier TV on the market. OLEDs are very expensive though, and unlike in LCDs, where costs have been slashed in recent years, there's no telling if OLED TV prices will fall nearly as fast or as far. However, it's likely that they won't, simply because as an incumbent technology, LCDs are produced on a massive scale by dozens of manufacturers.

Enough of the tech talk. Most people walk into a Best Buy (NYSE:BBY) and purchase the biggest TV at the lowest cost, in many cases willing to pay 10% or 15% more for a name brand like LG or Samsung (OTC:SSNLF). Some tech-savvy websites say that top of the line QD-enabled LCDs match OLEDs in overall picture quality. ConsumerReports.org does not necessarily support that thesis. It has OLEDs as the top 5 rated TVs and only then do QD LCDs come into view. However, the ratings are not terribly far apart, and OLEDs are typically 75% to 150% more expensive. We're talking about a price difference that can be in the $1,000(s), not just $100s. Bottom line? QD LCD TV's will very likely proliferate, and companies with strong QD technology and manufacturing platforms are well positioned to thrive.

That's where QMC comes in. I spent a lot of time understanding the key aspects of QDs before interviewing the Company's CEO, Sri Peruvemba. In speaking with him, one can stumble deep into the weeds very quickly. We agreed to keep the interview at the 30,000-foot level. The views expressed herein are entirely those of Mr. Peruvemba.

Sri, please tell readers more about Quantum Materials Corp?

Quantum Materials Corp ("QMC") [OTCQB: QTMM] is an innovative technology company that is primarily a manufacturer of quantum dots ("QDs"). We have developed a proprietary, IP-protected technology and process to manufacture QDs on a highly scalable basis, an achievement not common in the industry. A key competitive advantage is the continuous-flow production capacity we engineered to allow us to produce premium quality quantum dots for QD-enabled LCDs ("QD LCDs").

Quantum dots are truly amazing. They're a thousand-times smaller than microscopic crystals, or nano-crystals, which, when excited by UV to blue light, emit light of different colors depending on the material and size of the nano particle. Imagine shining a flashlight on a baseball and it glowing bright red. That's the general idea of a quantum dot, except, of course, almost inconceivably smaller in size.

++++

With our innovative approach, we aim to leapfrog traditional batch synthesis (non-uniform) production platforms. We're confident we can ship large, industrial-scale quantities of QDs, at very competitive prices. Samples have been sent to a number of the largest display technology companies in the world. A single commercial purchase order would put QMC on the map.

We have recruited some of the most accomplished scientists, researchers, engineers, and production personnel in the material sciences industry. This was a key factor in my decision to join QMC, I think we have an outstanding team, especially given our small size.

How large are the existing markets that you plan to penetrate? What new markets do you envision?

The most immediate market (and the one in which we have most traction), is in LCD TVs, representing hundreds of millions of units per year. QDs can also be used in billboards, monitors, laptops, & tablet devices. Each of these segments also represent the potential for hundreds of millions of units annually, so these display markets represent by far our biggest focus.

QMC was founded to drive QD solar energy (photovoltaic, or QDPV) development. We have a wholly-owned subsidiary to fulfill the promise that QDs hold in expanding PV implementation. A major advantage of QDPV is that established PV cells depend on relatively thick layers of material for adequate light energy absorption. By contrast, QDPV devices possess absorption rates orders-of-magnitude higher, they can absorb infrared energy at night and on cloudy days. That radically reduces the thickness and therefore the materials required, meaningfully cutting manufacturing costs.

So, quantum dot technology moderately enhances the picture quality of LCD TVs and other display monitors at less cost. Is there more to the story?

That's a good question. Yes, there is more to the story, especially with regard to solar and a number of other exciting end uses. For us though, higher quality QDs in much greater quantities and at significantly lower cost is our mantra. Our quantum dots will substantially enhance the picture quality of a LCD TV. Over time, we fully expect our QDs to be used in other products; we will be wholesaling them to companies spearheading widespread adoption of new end uses. As such, we will sidestep the technologically competitive and brand penetration risks of our customers.

Competition must be fierce, including from giants like Samsung. How can your company thrive in this environment?

I get asked that a lot! Much of the competition comes from smaller firms, like ours, trying to disrupt larger players. Some have won designs and shipped QDs into TV applications. We have patents and valuable IP licenses, and our scalable QD manufacturing process is highly automated, so we can offer customers both high quality and high capacity that's not significantly impacted by labor or geography. We see the larger players in the industry as potential customers and partners rather than competitors. Most don't have well-established, high-quality quantum dot technology in house, or sufficient manufacturing capacity. Large players should be eager to partner with a company like QMC.

You said large & small, public & private companies are already using quantum dots. What can you say about the cost, quality, and other elements of existing QDs?

Much of the success in the market emanates from companies that have supplied cadmium-based (heavy metal) QDs. This is important because, with restrictions on the use of cadmium in Europe and Japan, the future for those products is not bright. We are not the only game in town, but the volumes of products supplied by competitors is still quite small. Since we use manufacturing processes that we believe are superior, we expect to deliver a better product suite, again, at a very competitive price.

What about technology risk from new methods of producing quantum dots? Could your Intellectual Property become obsolete?

We are the new method for making QDs; we are the ones posing a risk to the incumbent's IP. Our IP is strong, and we are always developing new IP to secure and consolidate our position in the market. This is still an emerging science, so I expect a lot of developments in the next decade, and we're seeing a lot of research being done at universities, as well as at large and small companies. No one knows for sure, but the expanding size and wider range of end-uses promise a large QD market for the foreseeable future.

If quantum dot technology has been around for decades, why hasn't the market taken off?

Developing and optimizing the quality of materials and integrating new core technologies such as QDs takes time. It's no different from the original LCD & OLED technologies that took decades to develop. No different from lithium-ion batteries that are becoming ubiquitous. Products from select companies are shipping, and there are TVs in the market that utilize QDs. However, it's still early days, and the market is huge. While we think we have an opportunity to capture substantial market share, even more modest penetration could, over time, amount to hundreds of millions in revenue. Not bad for a company with an Enterprise Value [market cap + debt - cash] of US$25 million.

Do you feel that QMC has a finite window of opportunity during which it has to gain traction or risk missing key growth stages in the market?

Yes, each market from TV to Solar to innovative uses to ensure the authenticity of pharmaceuticals, each have windows of opportunity. We are constantly monitoring these windows to make sure we're well-positioned, and we think we are. However, as mentioned, display represents the clearest path to revenue generation. Solar provides us with longer-term potential, potential for which we could possibly self-fund based on cash flow from our display segment.

I understand that the Company has been sending sample material to a number of parties. What type of end-users are being targeted?

Yes, that's right. Companies receiving samples are those able to take our QDs and produce film composites for use in TVs and other display applications. We are talking about a handful of large, well-established players in the TV supply chain. This is a critical step for us, and we think it demonstrates where we stand in our development phase. Small companies like ours are able to sell samples because our customers believe that our technology and our ability to operate at industrial-scale is secure. That means the ability to ramp up if/when we receive commercial-scale purchase orders. And, look, the companies buying our samples aren't playing games, the display industry is a serious business. There's lots of money at stake, including investment on their part to evaluate our samples and make QD-composite films.

To the extent that you believe the valuation of QMC is attractive, why should readers consider investing now? Why not wait for commercial purchase orders?

As evidenced by major TV manufacturers beginning to offer QD-enhanced model lines, QDs have arrived, but the market is wide open. If we are at a tipping point in QDs, then waiting for a major de-risking event like a purchase order could mean missing out on a large move in the share price. It's that simple. We're confident that our team can provide QDs of the highest quality, in the volumes necessary, for wholesale commercial introduction.

If we can execute on that premise, QMC could be a very interesting company. Still, there remains considerable risk. We've been at this for years but have yet to cross the finish line. That's the unmistakable risk/reward proposition for investors, an opportunity which evolves as a company goes from, "lab to fab." We have a great future ahead of us, and we're aiming to create a valuable company for our employees, customers and shareholders.

Sri, thank you so much for your time and thought-provoking answers. Quantum dots are hard to conceptualize, but their functionality and importance in a growing number of end uses is just beginning. I hope this interview serves as inspiration to learn more about quantum dots and about Quantum Materials Corp. For further information on this subject, please take a look at the following:

Disclosures: Quantum Materials Corp. is a company that I, Peter Epstein, CFA, MBA, am invested in. I have no existing or prior relationship with CEO, Sri Peruvemba or QMC. QMC is a small cap company will all the attendant risks. This interview is in no way whatsoever a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell any securit

[syd777] 07/11/2016 01:09

Balaura well said, maybe it might infringe the 400 patents too.Whum if your still alive see you at the AGM.

[balaura] 07/11/2016 00:41

"Anyone can make cad free in their lab to test and create their new IP." said yet another shorter. Surely, mate. I could even make QD in my kitchen! Shame I cannot sell any product containing them, cause it will infringe at least 25 out of the numerous Nanoco Patents!

[syd777] 07/11/2016 00:28

Only a fool can't see the Merck deal,you must be blind to the real facts.

[ih_169538] 07/11/2016 00:11

Not an American.. sorry.If we were fact checking you though,Trump would have been right more times than you for sure.

[syd777] 07/11/2016 00:05

Crunch stop the jealousy and vote for Trump and not Hillary.