[ADVERT]
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Nanoco Group Plc LSE:NANO London Ordinary Share GB00B01JLR99 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.15 -0.74% 20.20 19.80 20.60 20.00 19.80 20.00 240,359 16:35:12
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Technology Hardware & Equipment 3.9 -6.0 -1.8 - 62

Nanoco Share Discussion Threads

Showing 24101 to 24125 of 24200 messages
Chat Pages: 968  967  966  965  964  963  962  961  960  959  958  957  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
16/7/2021
14:51
If you had read my post properly you'll see I wasn't responding specifically to your post. Opinions differ and mine is that if and when all is known about the situation we will find that Edelman acted in good faith and that the situation probably made him unwell, which I can tell you from my own experience and that of many others I've met is not at all uncommon among executives engaged in litigation. We would do well to remember our humanity and withdraw from judging him where he can not answer and when we do not know both sides of the story.
nigwit
16/7/2021
12:57
NigWit. I suspected there was a chance you might respond to my personal opinion negatively. If you don’t agree that’s fine but I am entitled to my view thank you. I read plenty of yours without need to respond in ascorbic terms. Most people, myself included, don’t want ‘Toxic’, but neither do we need to look beyond some of your comments if we do. No other entries I read on boards attempt to expand the argument quite like yours.
davidw1
16/7/2021
11:50
The subjective hatred for Edelman on these boards is toxic. It emanates from people hiding behind secret identities who would never have the courage to accuse him in public where he would have the opportunity to defend their nasty insinuations. There are even posters who on the one hand complain that Edelman let Samsung steal Nanoco's IP whilst simultaneously pointing to all the other incidences when Samsung has stolen IP from others. Edelman had a right to run his affairs as he wanted. His last sale did look bad at the time but that does not make it criminal or inexplicable in the light on information that subsequently appeared from Blue Fin. The company said his departure was to save money. Since that's what's happened and since business seems to be progressing well without him I take that at face value. Other directors make other personal choices and we may prefer them from our perspective but everyone posting here will also take the money when it suits them.
nigwit
16/7/2021
11:06
Hello to that old chestnut of Mike’s share sale, which I recollect Mike told the market was needed to meet a personal tax obligation. I was an ME fan and don’t blame him for NANO’s misfortune, which I perceive is mostly down to Samsung’s alleged actions. However, regarding Mike’s sale, I find it difficult to believe he ‘surrendered’ them without knowing the Apple contract was headed into a ‘cul de sac’. His actions could suggest either insider trading or possibly acting on a personal hunch just before Apple informed NANO of its intentions? We can’t know as none of us were there but his actions did not look at all good from outside and I agree likely led to his departure. That LOAM and others are still here shows their continued belief in the patents and product. Using profit from the previous sale to buy when the share price is at another low could be argued to be another shot at making more money and not a demonstration of Mike’s continued commitment?
davidw1
15/7/2021
19:32
He only brought a very small position yes than £10k worth IIRC. I think it may have cost him his position as CEO, or perhaps he was just too expensive to keep on. Regardless I much prefer BT’s style. Sensible forward looking statements and no hype, plus he keeps some skin on the game too.
andycapped
15/7/2021
18:31
I don't think Edelman used privileged information. As I recall after the Apple contract was cancelled a market research firm called Blue Fin published a paid for research note they'd produced previously for institutional clients that predicted that Apple would adopt laser technology, and not the QD based Heatwave product that Nanoco had made, in their iphones. I suspect Edelman was party to the research note and sold (but he then bought in at the last equity raise and hasn't sold again). Had we read the signals better we could have followed his lead but the next best thing was to buy more on the dip at 6.75p, which I did. It's long past time to stop bearing grudges anyway. Without Edelman it's doubtful Nanoco would have got spun out of Manchester Uni in the first place let alone earned millions from Apple and potentially billions from Samsung. And the Apple contract is quite possibly the one behind the IR sensors that STM Micro, who were further up the Heatwave supply chain, will be producing. I suspect they're for an Apple car among other products. I think when the truth is known Edelman will come out of it well.
nigwit
15/7/2021
17:50
Edleman was never canny he just stoked the share price with hype and used insider information to sell his holdings just before bad news was released ergo us customer cancellation..He did this at least twice. He's lucky hes not behind bars for insider trading!
spastics attack
15/7/2021
17:48
"Last chance saloon"..doubt it if that's the case the ii's would not sign up to the loan...No I think they are very comfortable on the one hand a growing organic business in a very fast growing sector and on the other hand comfortable of a positive outcome to the Samsung IP infringement and just playing the waiting game while watching the thumb screws turning on Samsung!
spastics attack
15/7/2021
15:53
Not surprising when equity has had enough after years of let downs and you are in last chance saloon... Edelman was pretty canny to take out his millions...
bagpuss67
15/7/2021
15:13
Deal of the century for the loan note holders. Which of us wouldn't have subscribed to a deal like that? I'm very surprised they couldn't find a convertible loan note deal on better terms.
supernumerary
15/7/2021
10:01
hashertu I don't see how it matters whether the loan is secured or not since if the company is not in a position to meet the liability when it fails due then the lenders will find themselves in a position to name their own terms to maintain it as a going concern unless someone else steps up. Don't get the wrong impression of me though. I remain bullish. I don't agree with those who say the RNS is worded more clearly than others, since I found those clearly worded too. However, for that reason, I'm confident that the RNS represents an honest expression of the truth as the company perceives it and further I think that three years is plenty of time to allow contingency for unexpected setbacks and complications. We should also bear in mind that sometimes projects are advanced so things might start to move faster than we've been told.
nigwit
15/7/2021
09:23
Hashertu - yes a bit of a contradiction there, but I get what he means....there is no contemplating defeat.
barkboo
15/7/2021
09:08
Nigwit. Post 23690. If the loan notes are unsecured, why do you say "potentially wiped out"? Notwithstanding, I agree that if the means to repay the loan is not available in 3 years time, then the company is going nowhere.
hashertu
15/7/2021
07:49
I thought there was no reaction this morning - I was on the SAR thread?? lol My thoughts - a non dilutive loan well and truly covers the Samsung games....and a lot in that rns that looks positive...they fancy beating Samsung, and that will be transformational for both the company, and us! Should see a positive market reaction this morning.
barkboo
15/7/2021
07:44
In the event of a successful outcome to the litigation or a change of control of the Company, the Loan Note holders are entitled to a success bonus of 105% of the nominal value of the Loan Notes Subscribed
bagpuss67
15/7/2021
07:40
One things for sure Me me me won't be wiped out..
bagpuss67
15/7/2021
07:22
Interesting RNS. I think it means Nano have three years to find the £4.5 million repayment or equity could potentially get wiped out by the Major Holders. Success comes down to the IR sensor market buying and/or the Samsung Litigation. Confident wording, high stakes, potentially very rewarding.
nigwit
14/7/2021
13:11
Certainly would be jfacwc,so keeping all of mine.
davidw1
14/7/2021
11:13
Would be such a shame to miss the boat once this good news arrives though.
jfacwc
14/7/2021
10:16
Also, Samsung continues to sell CFQD TV so the number is increasing, and there remains the possibility that damages are awarded on a ‘wilful’ basis (premium of 3X)or possibly that a profit based formulae is arrived at for damages, which could equate to rather more because Samsung has been selling NANOCO’s technology at a premium price. Having said that it does feel like the share price will have a difficult time until either PTAB releases its decision, or there is news of near term income, from another market sector - it is clear that QD for IR sensors takes years to bring to market, hence a distinct lack of excitement for the share price at this point.
davidw1
14/7/2021
06:36
Yes Bones698 we all can see from where you are coming from simply by checking your posting history pretty sad really. 60m tvs sold at $15 licence fee per unit equates to $900m lost licence revenues over the last 6 years. Of course we all know you know absolutely nothing on Nanoco.
spastics attack
14/7/2021
00:12
60m mkt cap . Virtually no revenue and not real huisness or customers . Heavily loss making for a company not making much of anything . Seems everything is pinned on a IP lawsuit against a major company . Personally can't see the sums involved in a settlement or decision justifying the companies current nkt cap . Judging by the share price lately seems I'm not alone in my thinking perhaps . Does anyone know how many units Samsung have sold of the possible infringement article and it's value ? If it's 1 million tvs and the cost of the part infringing is 1 dollar then u can see where I'm coming from .
bones698
12/7/2021
10:06
Nanoco don't seem to need or be interested in any PR. They've said that they're already well known in the industry and the relationships they're building bear that out. It looks to me as if QDs aren't making much progress in displays though. Apart from Samsung no-one's adopted CFQDs. There are a few Cd based products but advanced phosphors like GE's KSF have more of the LED display market for now. I expect to see steady progress and organic growth in the SWIR market though.
nigwit
10/7/2021
22:25
None of the display industry pundits seem to have much to say about Nanoco,apart from the odd mention of legal action etc.
andycapped
10/7/2021
12:21
Not at all. It’s just information presented without any side.
nigwit
Chat Pages: 968  967  966  965  964  963  962  961  960  959  958  957  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
NANO
Nanoco
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210917 23:34:09