Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[vasilis] 23/11/2016 17:05

TP - Great stuff! I wont spoil your own reading by saying anything specific, but keep VRS and where we are with the graphene sector today in mind, particularly when reading chapters 3 & 4. Worth their weight in.................graphene? :-)

[the prophet] 23/11/2016 15:54

Vasilis

thanks for your post and your views. The book sounds interesting, I've splashed out on an Amazon second hand copy!

[superg1] 23/11/2016 15:05

Right

nearly there but struggling on one part.

First and to me plesant observations. There is always a worry for me with such a long time and a low price and such a high volume that you have many PIs stuffed to the eyeballs with shares and panic on the slightest issue.

Over 5 million of the supply went to a very small number of individuals, think graphene nano platelet true definition on the high end scale.. For PIs it seems holdings are small. I worry about some like I've seen on others, £50k with £100k worth and a mad £150k on a share I thought was very high risk and proved to be a dud.

Next up and a very important part is gearing. :-) hardly a breath of wind in that area.......... happy days.

No sign of mad gamblers no sign of over-loaded PIs just some that got theirs no doubt not even knowing ADVFN exists.

The odd fund here and there has simply abandoned small cap positions across the board so if I have time I may hunt for shares where they held and are exiting for a trade on the bounce.

Now I'm off to look for the large unknowns in November and then I should have a fair idea of the known knowns.

Nuts for those funds to sell imo just as the ducks are lining up but I know such funds couldn't give a damn on what is or isn't lining up. When they decide to get out of small caps or a particular sector that's it. A few million quid missed is absolute peanuts to them and a minute fraction of their % target to be hit.

[theklf] 23/11/2016 14:24

www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology-news/newsid=45157.php

Graphene shows promise for composite applications
(Nanowerk News) At Composites Europe 2016, the Graphene Flagship presents the Graphene Pavilion, showcasing development and innovation in using graphene in composites. Highlights include aircraft with graphene-enhanced skin and propellor blades and an impact-resistant motorcycle helmet. The Graphene Connect workshop held alongside offers opportunities for networking and collaboration between research and academia.
Due to its unique combination of properties, graphene is being used to improve the functionality of composites. Graphene is a two-dimensional carbon-based material in the form of robust, flexible sheets that are a single atom thick. It is lightweight but at the same time strong and an excellent conductor of heat and electricity. Graphene sheets with a lateral size of several microns can be produced on a large scale from the exfoliation of graphite.
The Graphene Flagship, Europe’s biggest ever research initiative, carries out advanced research into the creation of unique and innovative materials by incorporating graphene into composites. There are many potential application areas including the aerospace and automotive industries, energy applications, structural foams, films and coatings.
Graphene Helmet
Graphene Helmet by Momo Design and IIT
“Our goal is to improve our control of the properties of graphene at the nanoscale to obtain truly disruptive products and fully exploit the unique electrical, mechanical or optical properties of graphene,” says Vincenzo Palermo, Graphene Flagship leader of the Polymer Composites Work Package.
Under the umbrella of the Graphene Flagship, a number of partners are exhibiting products and prototypes at the Composites Europe 2016 trade fair in Düsseldorf. The most recent commercial product, coming out of a collaboration between Graphene Flagship partner Italian Institute of Technology and Italian design company Momodesign, is a motorcycle helmet with a graphene coating that allows better distribution of impact force, making the helmet less susceptible to damage even in high temperature conditions.
The world’s first graphene-skinned aircraft, called Prospero, was successfully flown at the Farnborough International Air Show in the UK earlier this year. This example of an industry/academia collaboration between the Universities of Manchester and Lancaster (UK) and several SMEs, including Haydale Composite Solutions (UK), envisions how graphene might be used as a potentially disruptive technology in the aerospace sector. Visitors to the Graphene Flagship stand at Composites Europe 2016 will have the opportunity to study the details of Prospero on the ground, as well as a drone with graphene-enhanced propeller blades, exhibited for the first time.
At Composites Europe, Graphene Flagship partner CNR-ISOF (Italy) will also exhibit metal-free, flexible near-field communication (NFC) antennas based on graphene. These antennas are laminated on different substrates such as PET, PVC or Kapton, and communicate with normal smartphones through an NFC reader. These results show that graphene antennas can be used directly in working devices, with no additional tuning of software or hardware in the interacting devices.
Avanzare Innovacion Technologica (Spain) is another Graphene Flagship partner exhibiting at Composites Europe. Avanzare has successfully launched a graphene additive for resins that is already being used in high-volume industrial applications. The graphene enhances the functionality of the resin, combining graphene’s electrical conductivity and mechanical strength with excellent corrosion resistance. This new graphene resin can be used for corrosion-resistant tanks and pipes for storage and transport of potentially explosive chemicals – an application that was previously wholly dependent on metallic systems.
For companies looking to explore the potentials of graphene in composites the Graphene Flagship will hold a Graphene Connect workshops during the Composites Europe 2016 trade fair. The workshop will focus on graphene-based composites and coatings, including lightweight and multi-functional composites for aerospace and automotive industries, offering a platform for networking and collaboration between academia and industry.
Source: The Graphene Flagship


Read more: Graphene shows promise for composite applications

[superg1] 23/11/2016 13:51

Yet another everyday use that didn't cross my mind

[superg1] 23/11/2016 12:47

re

Having a competitor in this field, such as Haydale, with only 17.01 million shares in issue and a share price of 180 -185p, compared to VRS with 105.52 shares in issue and a share price of just 11.5p makes me nervous. Haydale have a much stronger investment engine to raise funding to compete via equity release than VRS by an order of nearly 16 to 1 . Given this, I need to know just how much of different market VRS are operating in.


???

They are two different companies. One produces GNPs and the other enables them. VRs do not need an enabler in many end products neother do others. The whole market ism open to VRS,. Haydle being enablers have thei market reduced, but sit well if they remain the goo too compnay for enabling.

They however have no security of supply that is obvious on the few layer level and any few layer supplier may get a better deal elsewhere and stop supplying Haydale.

I get the funding thing as it's much less dilutive and totally agree but I'm here for the business view not dilition view. I fear dilution less tham others. I see dilution for gain here not to spalsh out on company jollies, bonuses and plush hotels on junk trips. Then another £3 to £5 mill down the drain most in salaries

I expect VRS to dilute if they need to cash in on a money making opportunity, EG a material order for GNPs beyond current capacities that may dictate a good business sense.

If Hayd come to VRS asking for high quality GNPs, if the price is right then why not? It doesn't necessarily affect them and what they want to do, it would just be a very tightly worded deal and cash in the bank. I'd do take or pay or similar, otherwise they could sod off.

[superg1] 23/11/2016 12:27

Vas

Well put I have done my DD.

re I just find this current 'graphene/graphite' disruptive phase a very exciting one - but there is an air of the 'wild west goldrush' about it. Time will no doubt tell who is claiming 'gold' but in reality has found iron pyrite (fool's gold)- and who will have found actual 'gold' in customers eyes.

There is a hell of lot of folls gold around and not even fools gold it's just graphite NOT grapehen in mnay cases. Standards will siort that out. End users trying it will only get bitten once.


That is why VRS kept their head down, they too were just as excited but early doors thought sod off graphene is years away, it came to them not them to it.

So they mastered few layer scale. With 25000 papers each year there is enough info saying 'hey this stuff is good'. They are plenty running around making claims which are just claims of what graphene does.

Producers have nothing if they don't have data to verify what they have, how and what it will go into, and what happens once it introduced.

Until VRS did those tests and in their minds they had something which may prove to be nothing. They are engineers, they know great ideas and on paper conclusions don't work like that. You have to do it and see if it works.

How can you chat to anyone saying we have this and we reckon it will do this.

Now compare that to, we have this (3rd party interntionally recognised verified and tested). We mixed it into this and got these results (same 3rd pary verification). So for you we can do this, not talk about possiblities, this is what it will do. Hmmmmm "Can you scale that up" "yes".

Then it all comes down to into viability and costs taking into account regulated and unregulated on timings to market.

[vasilis] 23/11/2016 11:44

TP - Fair doos. Management does indeed come in all shapes and sizes - good and bad in every sector.

The point where we may 'agree to differ' is that from my experience a different kind of 'management make-up' pertains to nascent high tech business ventures, eg when VCs put up their dosh and supply certain skills - including accounting - these are invariably a 'back up' to the main activities of the innovators. As the business progresses - from the garage in the case of VRS - and more money is raised and the business expands, investors want to see someone in the company with the necessary financial skills to keep a financial discipline. That's usually when you get an accountant fully on board in my experience.

I only really raised the issue as much of what SG is digging up - I have visions of SG being a dig-happy terrier in a previous incarnation :-) - boils down to 'what exactly are companies X, Y Z etc offering and what is the management standing and credibility behind what is being offered.' I've a long background in innovation and I just find this current 'graphene/graphite' disruptive phase a very exciting one - but there is an air of the 'wild west goldrush' about it. Time will no doubt tell who is claiming 'gold' but in reality has found iron pyrite (fool's gold)- and who will have found actual 'gold' in customers eyes.

For those interested, I strongly recommend you get a copy of 'Crossing the Chasm - marketing and selling disruptive products to mainstream customers', 3rd ed., paperback published 2014, by Geoffrey Moore. I have dozens and dozens of business and finance books of every description, but this book will be of value to anyone who wants to understand - in a very readable and interesting way - all the issues about getting a new and disruptive offering from the 'Innovators' to the main marketplace. It is very pertinent to what is going on here and I would recommend anyone investing in new technologies to read it.

Overall, the case of Graphene is already looking to become a classic 'business school case study' from what I have been able to assess so far.

TP - Here endeth the lesson :-)

[the prophet] 23/11/2016 11:23

Ridicule

Just a few points that may be of interest:

1) At the recent investor do NR said that they had kept a deliberately low profile over the last year or so wrt the graphene side as they didn't want to shout and get too much interest and whilst they got the ducks lined up, well, that's not the exact expression he used, but words to that effect. The implication was clear, they are looking to be more vocal and pushing out what they've got from now. Witness investor day and US exhibition as perhaps the start of this process.

2) I'm not worried re Haydale being in a better position to raise funds. Perhaps they need to be, they lost £3.6m last year, I assume they are probably on for another big loss this f/y. Compare that to VRS, who are forecast to be profitable in the f/y starting in just 4 months time and VRS have stated they wish to keep dilution to a minimum.

3)I fully agree with your point re Haydale/huntsman,as you say, the statement has not been challenged. It makes no sense at all to me, but then perhaps we are missing something? I'm not worried or concerned about it either, let Haydale do whatever it wants, my focus is on VRS and the graphene market is surely big enough for umpteen companies to all have different ways and methods of exploiting it.

I also don't understand VRS's involvement with Haydale, but perhaps it will become clearer moving forwards.

[ridicule] 23/11/2016 11:08

SG and others. We must all be careful that our gleened knowledge of Graphene and the associated GNPs do not become so influencial that they cloud our observations on business developments in this market.

The following is out in print in the public domain and no one from either Haydale or Huntsman have challenged it to my knowledge:

"Ray Gibbs, chief executive of Haydale, is confident a deal will soon be signed which could potentially create a recurring revenue stream for the small cap. It could be a big prize as Huntsman is a major resin supplier to the tooling market. Gibbs believes Haydale will be asked to supply a master batch of graphine-enhanced resin. Huntsman will then be responsible for sales and marketing. We believe they want to focus on the automotive industry for the enhanced resin, but they won't tell us until a license deal is signed he says.

Gibbs suggests the contract-assuming one is awarded-would involve Haydale buying resin from hHntsman, adding its magic, and then selling the enhanced resin back to the chemicals group. That implies Haydale would need to find a chunk of cash to act as working capital to fund the purchase of the raw material."

There are no indications of the quantities involved or the quality/type of the graphene infusion process. Given SGs input it would not seem that it is 'top end', but these people are not stupid and I cannot accept some of the comments here suggesting or infering that they are.

I think we should be focusing on why the VRS NOMAD is not achieving the same level of publicity for VRS and ensuring the market understands where VRS sit in relations to competitors such as Haydale. If this was made clear and was as positive as SG believes, the share price would start to move.

I for one, as an investor in VRS and not Haydale, would like to see far more clarity on where VRS sit. I hope there will be some clarification in 6 days time when the latest results are declared.

Having a competitor in this field, such as Haydale, with only 17.01 million shares in issue and a share price of 180 -185p, compared to VRS with 105.52 shares in issue and a share price of just 11.5p makes me nervous. Haydale have a much stronger investment engine to raise funding to compete via equity release than VRS by an order of nearly 16 to 1 . Given this, I need to know just how much of different market VRS are operating in.

[superg1] 23/11/2016 09:43

Hayd

I need to move off that and sort of the pile of supply info to give us a fighting chance v the MMs. BTW it may well have all gone from the 2 sources I suspected but I need to dig in and work it out.

So to Rid re Haydale/Huntsman.

I tried to find the line where Hayd went on about strength and Huntsman impressed by thermal and electrical but donlt have time, it's there somewhere

Forget strength in the resin for now that aspect has been abandoned/stuck on the back burner.

The zulu principle is right if you read all the news and detail it's there for all to see.

Obviously Hayd investors may well be aware the strength side is shelved for now but will I suspect it could be a part of the carbon fibre tests unless that it thermal interest too. Carbon fibre tests will be a while yet and if it's strength then there is know mass way forward at this time.

There is a mass way forward with one player and it's simply down to maths not technology blockers.

What I can't comment on is what is best for thermal and electrical in composites for the gain they want as I have been looking at strength. If you want top electrical as in fuel cells then the fewer the layers the better, I do know that.

Right off for lot's of caffeine and a long boring trawl through information stacked up.

[superg1] 23/11/2016 07:41

Rid

I'll come back to the topic a bit later today, there was a line or too that caught my attention re thermal electrical.

I also strongly believe the origianl news talking about a master batch has left investors perhaps interpeeting that correctly imo.

What it seems to read like which is like most other MOUs collaborations (AGM/VRS etc) is tests on products not tests done and now they want big supplies.

The last I read seemed to indicate the switch is now to test with carbon fibre. Note year end comments about timings in general. The carbon fibre tests could be a year or more. EG some VRS etsts have been going on for 2 1/2 years re electric vehicles and no result announced yet.

On the large resin buy and need to fund raise for that then I haven't found anythind to suggest that yet and the scenario as explained around that seems BS if not impossible on the maths v Haydales position.

But a quick point re thermal electrical. Many compounds and plastics are insulators so when you stick the worlds most highly conductive material in them you will see massive gains in thermal and electrical conductivity. And the gain is relative to the insulation properties of the host material.

EG if the Araldite resin is a poor conductor yes you can stick just about any Graphite or GNPs in it and performance should improve dramatically. That's why Aerospace want GNPs in composite not heavier copper mesh it solves conductivity re ligthening strikes.

[superg1] 22/11/2016 21:14

Haydale 2015 year end news. Note the synthetic AGM way comments and anything over 10 will end up not being called GNPs.

I'd love to know where they can find graphene at $50 to $2000 per kg. The current rate for a pure graphene wafer 1 gram in weight is £2000 to make.


Haydale is focussed not on the technically challenging single sheet graphene but stacks of graphene sheets in the range of 5 to 100, generally acknowledged, depending on the stacks of sheets, as few layered graphene ("FLGs") or graphene nanoplatelets ("GNPs"). Both FLGs and GNPs are generally produced by a number of manufacturers from organic mined graphite. These materials can be produced by a 'top down' production method, involving the exfoliation of mined graphite to produce flakes. Alternatively, they can be produced by a 'bottom up' method, such as chemical vapour deposition from a carbon source such as methane. The bottom up (synthetic) process generally uses an energy consumptive hot reactor (900 degrees Celsius or more) and with a cost structure that means the material cannot compete on price with the GNPs from mined graphite. Hence the need for the synthetically produced material to find applications that are not competing with the mined organic GNPs.

Price Performance Conundrum

With many different "graphenes" available in the market place today, we believe the buyer can easily get confused where prices can range from $50 to over $2,000 per kg. The temptation is to plump for the cheapest available, but more often than not, this is not the best option. Haydale has built up years of experience in evaluating the market place and we know that all materials are different and will vary in performance as well as price. Understanding the price/performance matrix is critical in evaluating the material that suits the application and is economically viable. Moreover we know which supplier can produce scalable, consistent quality product; the key to commercialising this material.

[cyberbub] 22/11/2016 21:09

That 100k trade this morning must have been a buy, a relatively substantial one for VRS. Have the MMs dropped the share price to try and get sellers to fill it? Or is there a shorter I wonder... brave if so, in this illiquid stock.

[superg1] 22/11/2016 20:44

Rid can you now see the Hayd problem and claims re Huntsman, it doesn;t add up by a long long way.

Now listen to the VRS version.

We want your copper foam, how many, 1 million a month. Sorry we are in no position to do it at this time. Now that would have been great news to play with aat aorund £10 mill to £50 mill per year or 100 times that if you go buy goodfellow VRS copper foam rates.

Graphene paint, wow great. Can you paint 5 ships for us.

No sorry we are unable to do that scale at this time.

Huntsman to Haydale can you do resins for us, busloads of the stuff, hell yeah.

With what may I ask, it doesn't exist, they can sign whatever they like they can't do bulk few layer resin unless they are about to announce some secret company that's kept it quiet for all this time.

I will try and find Haydale loadings and data about results.

[superg1] 22/11/2016 20:32

TP

I didn't think it relevant at the time but on the 'my baby' it's not the baby of VRS.

You know how I dig, so when someone pull 2 rabbits out of the hat, the tech and gaining 2D tech straight out of Manchester. I get so curious to ask how the hell those opportinuites were spotted. Well they weren't the tech came looking for them and at first galnce like all here including me the first thought was 'Graphene that is years away', but when you have the world lead saying 'No look at this'

VRS were already hitting awards and chatting to gov figures including the PM. The gov want university tech being developed by UK companies taking it from idea to industry.

Hence Innovate funding, National graphene institute, national composites centre, Royce institute etc etc etc. North west North east South west. You can see where it's all going, a hope to create a UK excellence and a lead in the sector.

[luckyorange] 22/11/2016 18:04

I know the implications ridicule, but there is always a get out clause if another supplier comes along i.e. not up to spec etc; no sentiment with big companies and always very high risk doing business with them particularly when they take up a large part of your production capabilities. In short I don't think that it is a good idea and don't think that Haydale will go down that road, if they did and if I was invested I would run for the hills.

[vasilis] 22/11/2016 17:25

TP

Let me outline again what I actually said in my post 634.

After a few general comments re the importance of good management, I then put forward the background of Ray Gibbs - company accountant CV in one form or another - and Neill Ricketts as a founder/owner with an engineering background as a comparison and without any personal comment.

I then posed two questions bearing in mind that graphene is an emerging business technology and we are still in the 'early adopters' phase. This is a very different case to any mature business - paint business or otherwise - and merely asked folks who they thought was best to head up a company in an emerging technology sector and to answer specific questions. I made no other comment.

From this comparison of two individuals backgrounds you have deduced I am being a 'bit unfair on Ray Gibbs' and follow this by setting up a 'straw man' argument about accountants' ability to run companies. I never said accountants could not run companies. Indeed, I am not making any general statement regarding accountants ability to run companies. What I did actually ask was two specific questions re two specific companies and about two specific CEOs.

I thought I'd clarify as your response went well beyond what I actually said in my post.

[ridicule] 22/11/2016 16:54

luckyorange It does not work like that. The sale enhancement and buy back will all be contractually binding in a supplier based off-take contract with clear contractual obligations on both parties.