Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[jointer13] 01/11/2018 09:18

we don't have a problem with the quality.

but I reckon a lot of them out there do.

[loglorry1] 01/11/2018 09:18

@ellissj but it's just been posted via an email from your CTO that 90% of Nanene is FLG Graphene. It's a GnP solution not Graphene under this ISO/PAS definition as far as I can see.

Why therefore the premium in market cap? If I can be so bold maybe this premium should be called the "Twitter Premium"?

Is it perhaps true that only 90% has to be 2-10 layers to be classed FLG? Might be but the ISO/PAS doesn't say that.

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:16

Sorry I typed it out and it still won't show properly

[ellissj] 01/11/2018 09:16

Indeed jointer. We are invested in a credible story here imo ! Atb. Ellis

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:15

It may not be essential for us to produce entirely

[jointer13] 01/11/2018 09:14

ellissj...the quality always shines through.

'Versarien plc (AIM: VRS), the advanced materials engineering group, is very pleased to announce that it has won a single supplier competitive tender for the ongoing supply of nanomaterials, including the Company's graphene, to the Centre for Process Innovation Limited ("CPI"). The evaluation of the tender was based principally on the quality and specification of the graphene to be supplied with additional marks awarded for price and delivery.'

[ellissj] 01/11/2018 09:13

Indeed, any graphene 'product' either meets the iso standard, or it doesn't. And is thus 'characterised' as either 2D graphene in it's nature, or 3D graphite in it's nature. And thus, depending upon it's essential nature, it will perform in end products accordingly. 2D graphene is a 'wonder' material and performs better than 3D graphite. Once you have a 2D product per iso standard, can you scale it up at economic cost? Think back to nga graphene council presentation from denis kolstov, iso standards expert. Neill tweet says vrs can do both. Likely Quality at scale and at an economic price. Aimo. Dyor. Best ellis

[festario] 01/11/2018 09:13

Hidden buying going on again, because every time I check the price to sell, it's going... UP!

[redchef] 01/11/2018 09:13

Talking to oneself is the first sign of insanity apparently

[loglorry1] 01/11/2018 09:11

Ok thanks. Would you agree under the PAS standards Nanene will not be FLG Graphene but something else? At most one can say it's 90% FLG?

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:10

It may not be essential for us to produce entirely

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:10

There is a lot more to it than most think

[loglorry1] 01/11/2018 09:09

1teepee struggling to understand what you mean. Useful if you can expand a bit please?

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:08

No link as it was a direct email

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:07

Sorry can't seem to copy and paste properly

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:07

It may not be essential for us to produce entirely

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:06

It may not be essential for us to produce entirely

[loglorry1] 01/11/2018 09:06

@1teepee the PAS 1201 came into effect at the end of Aug. Under its definition Nanene being only 90% up to ten layers would not be classed as FLG Graphene as far as I can tell.

PureGRAPH say their product is FLG.

Why the £150m premium on the VRS shareprice then especially given the huge difference in claimed production capacity.

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 09:05

It may not be essential for us to produce entirely

[owenga] 01/11/2018 09:03

Isn't that some tin pot company in Australia that makes graphite and about to go bankrupt, unless it can raise some cash on AIM.. good luck with that...lol

[redchef] 01/11/2018 09:02

Panic setting in again I see. Making 2+2=5 or even more when it comes to graphene quality. If posters believe the stats they quote why are they on this bb and not on the one they consider to have the better product?

[squire007] 01/11/2018 09:01

WHo are FGR, never heard of them ........ :-)

[loglorry1] 01/11/2018 08:58

@1teepee do you have a link to that?

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 08:54

From our cto

[1teepee] 01/11/2018 08:54

There are no ISO standards as yet for Graphene and related materials, but a standard is due out in the next 6 months. In the mean time we are characterising every batch using Raman, SEM, XPS and XRD measurments to understand our materials abiding by Good Practice guides or British standards for what characterisation techniques should be used. Most graphene producers adopt their own classification procedure, and we are going through routes to have that validated at the moment. Typically we might say > 10 layers is a cut-off for graphitic flakes. Thickness is also only one characteristic, we also need to consider the overall aspect ratio of the flakes (lateral size:thickness ratio), and how the material performs in a final application. The standard will most likely define samples as the following:1 layer = single layer graphene2 layers = bilayer graphene3 = trilayer graphene4-5 = few layer graphene5-9 = multi-layer graphene>10 layers = graphene nanoplateletsNanene is therefore likely to be a mixture of few layer graphenes to graphene nanoplatelets.