Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Well see after hours
Hi
Thanks for the heads up
Great post
Bought back in at 11.52
Got out at 11.65
Are you kidding me?
We own a stock that cannot be traded and that's your best answer?
FYI I called the canadian commission and they said they cannot give info. When I called company they said lawyers are looking into it that was over 6 months ago,
So please don't preach to me that it's ok. It's not ok.
Canada is in a lot better shape lol. People with serious money up here lol. And no we don't all live with polar bears.
What an insulting post.
My question
Status of Canadian cease trade order.
Your right.
And we all hope that's the scenario.
Why grateful?
SS should be grateful.
I hope they can answer some And
Not sweet f$c@ all.
In the meantime nanoco up .34 cents.
Im so happy.
Now its freaking showtime for qtmm
Not a freak show I hope
GLTA
Hi,
went down 7.5 % huge volume for this stock.
In january 4 directors bought in, that must of been a good sign of things to come... I cant explain people trying to do a shakeout before earnings? last earnings were in november. next will be marhc or beginning april if filed on time.
I dont have level 2. to see if institutions sold. it was a great run for the last two weeks. similar to the one in march last year... maybe anither is around the corner. i dont see this one going back down to 7$. hang on... in the next 2-3 quarters its going to explode if things go well. possibly up to who knows 18-20$ by years end and im not a fortune teller
good luck.
Great idea
Mine is why did they knock off a name of a company that's already established in India.
A good quality circus act like cirque du soleil. Especially considering its Canadian its always enjoyable.
That was my exact feeling two years ago.
They must be closer to the goal line.
If they are not I want the CEO to shoot the
Shit to the shareholders.
Long overdue.
Crunch
If your.from BC
Must be frustrating not being able to buy. Especially knowing more than us....
Cease trade order for canada.
I called the Alberta securities commission on Friday.
They couldn't really tell me anything. They said they are not at liberty to discuss this matter.
I told them that qtmm is up to date. So what's the fuss?
They said its nice they are up to date but they have to meet Canadian standards as well...
Last I called qtmm they said lawyers are looking into it.
I'll never sell at a loss rather wait it out and worse case lose it all.
Glta
We should know something soon enough.
They should of never gone public. Nightmare for shareholders
Can't get worse than this.
I hope they have something to show other than to stick it to
The shareholders.
I did remember someone saying on here they didn't want to make it public and in return are handling it as they wish.
There's no return here. Do or die.
Let's see how this one plays out,
Glta
You forgot one thing.
They have stocks for sale.
Lets hope that they can execute otherwise sooner rather than later.
I
Warren buffet is how old?
He just bought Heinz....
Those 2 million sales stack up.
They are beeing perceived as the leader in the industry.
It's all perception. When will qtmm
Shine?
Hopefully in 2013.
GLTA
I always bid under the ask
Makes me feel good
Reading in tea leaves. Omg that resumes the last three years. Good one
we need a front page article in business Mag with qtmm possibly featured.
Ill frame it the day it happens lol
They must have their game plan
Having hold back for so long.
I don't think they want to rush in now and make a mistake,
I think qtmm needs a nice article front page article in a business magazine and newspapers to propel it . Revenue also would help( small detail)
You see sometimes you just have to ask! Lol
Go bac
Need to pay for a vacation
Almost there
Appointment of Key Business Development Executives
06 February 2013
Appointment of Key Business Development Executives
Nanoco Group plc (AIM: NANO), a world leader in the development and manufacture of cadmium-free quantum dots and other nanomaterials, announces the appointment of two highly experienced business development executives in the USA and South Korea to support the roll-out of Nanoco's quantum dot technology in the display industry.
Margaret "Peggy" Hines PhD, a quantum dot specialist with an impressive track record in research, development and commercialisation, has been appointed Global Technical Business Development Director. During her academic research, Dr Hines played a key role in the development of core/shell quantum dots. She has also gained considerable commercial experience at nanotechnology companies including Solexant Corporation and Evident Technologies, Inc.
Dr Hines will be based in the USA and will support The Dow Chemical Company's roll out of Nanoco's cadmium-free quantum dots to the global display industry as well as providing technical assistance to Nanoco's customer base. Dow signed an exclusive, global licensing deal with Nanoco in January 2013 for the manufacture, marketing and sale of Nanoco's cadmium-free quantum dots into the display industry.
Jin-Ho Park PhD, an advanced materials specialist with years of experience in R&D and product development at Samsung Electronics, has been appointed Vice President Business Development, Korea. Dr Park, a South Korean national, gained his PhD at Imperial College, London, and carried out post-doctoral research at the University of Manchester. Prior to joining Nanoco, he was a principal engineer at Samsung, working in the company's semiconductor R&D centre in South Korea.
Dr Park, who will be based in South Korea, will work closely with Nanoco's key Korean customers and potential customers.
Michael Edelman, Nanoco's CEO, commented: "I'm delighted to welcome Peggy and Jin-Ho to Nanoco. They both have excellent commercial and research experience and I look forward to their contribution to the successful roll-out of Nanoco's cadmium-free quantum dot technology."
For further information:
Nanoco
+ 44 (0) 161 603 7900
Michael Edelman, Chief Executive Officer
Colin White, Chief Financial Officer
Bank of America Merrill Lynch - Joint Broker
+ 44 (0) 20 7996 2490
Matthew Blawat
Canaccord Genuity - Nomad and Joint Broker
+44 (0) 20 7523 8000
Simon Bridges
Cameron Duncan
Buchanan
+ 44 (0) 20 7466 5000
Mark Court / Fiona Henson / Sophie Cowles
Notes for editors:
About Nanoco Group plc
Nanoco is a world leader in the development and manufacture of commercial quantities of quantum dots for use in multiple applications including lighting, solar cells and biological imaging. Nanoco's quantum dots, which are free of heavy metals and comply with RoHS legislation, can be combined into a wide range of materials including liquids, polymers and glass. Nanoco forms strategic partnerships with major end users across a range of applications.
Nanoco was founded in 2001 and is based in Manchester, UK. Nanoco began trading on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange in May 2009 under the ticker symbol NANO.
For further information, please visit www.nanocogroupplc.com.
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
END
NRABRGDDDBGBGXU
Note 1: Prices and trades are provided by Digital Look Corporate Solutions and are delayed by at least 15 minutes.
Powered By Digital Look This is a solution provided by Digital Look Corporate Solutions incorporating their prices, data, charts, fundamentals and investor tools on this site. Terms & Conditions
This is finally the type of news we wanted to hear.
Go get them Stevie boy
Vinf ?
Please elaborate
Another excellent post from Tetsuo on Stockhouse.
grafoid
It is a private company at the moment and as such they do not need to publish public information. There is enough circumstantial evidence to support Grafoid, their ability to produce bulk Graphene (bi-tri layer as we know, but maintaining the electrical properties that are compromised through other production methods) at a low price and to believe the stake will have great value in the future.
Agreement with CVD. Their CEO (not Gary Economo) stated in very plain English in the NR:
"By combining Grafoid's processing capabilities, understanding of applications/markets and by finding common ground for nano carbon material functionalization, we believe CVD can more efficiently leverage our 30 years of technical know-how in custom equipment design, manufacturing and process development for novel nano materials and their transformation into macro size commercially viable materials."
Dr Chui added, "Grafoid is a reliable supplier of high quality graphene".
Finally we come to Hydro Quebec's IREQ. Again NR agreed by both companies and out in the public domain. Probably should quote, as no one round here looks to have even bothered reading the NR.
"The 50-50 collaborative agreement sets out terms with the objective of creating patentable inventions by combining graphene, supplied by Grafoid, with Hydro-Québec's patented lithium iron phosphate technologies. Two key, specific commercial target markets - the rechargeable automobile battery sectors and batteries for mobile electronic devices used in smartphones, computing tablets and laptop computers - were identified in the agreement. Hydro-Québec will study Grafoid's graphene conductivity, electrochemical performance and its effects in electrode formulations, electrolyte and separator optimizations. Detailed characterizations of Grafoid''s supplied materials will be undertaken at IREQ''s cutting edge facilities using its advanced electron microscopy, spectrographic and other in-house technologies.
On the 'balance of probabilities', it is fair to assume from this evidence that Grafoid can produce Grafoid in decent quantities at a decent price. But the usual suspects look to discredit and say this is not so!!!!
Next we move onto the Geeraf1 and the next angle of attack. That Grafoids Graphene is not Graphene at all. It is indeed bi –layer (2 layers) and tri-layer (3 layers Graphene. It says so on the Grafoid website, no-one is misleading anyone here. Next, apparently it cannot be used in high end applications, it is only going to be any good for throwing into composite materials. OK, back we go to the IREQ NR.
“rechargeable automobile battery sectors and batteries for mobile electronic devices used in smartphones, computing tablets and laptop computers”. And “conductivity, electrochemical performance and its effects in electrode formulations, electrolyte and separator optimizations”. IREQ appear to believe is has value for these purposes.
A little research my good friend and all would have been revealed to you. In many ways bi & tri-layer is BETTER than single layer Graphene. Graphene systems, consisting of a few crystalline monolayers of carbon atoms, stand out because of their unusual electronic properties and of their potential for applications in nanoelectronics. Did you know that bi-layer Graphene has the sought after tuneable band-gap needed in electronic applications, that is missing in single layer Graphene? Well clearly not (or you seek to mislead), so educate yourself.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0905/0905.0923.pdf
http://techportal.eere.energy.gov/technology.do/techID=372
http://www-als.lbl.gov/index.php/holding/56-bilayer-graphene-gets-a-bandgap.html
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0707/0707.2487.pdf
Tri-layer also has these properties and some special ones of its own:
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1105/1105.4658.pdf
http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3052
http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v4/n6/full/nnano.2009.89.html
http://phys.org/news/2011-10-scientists-unusual-quasiparticles-tri-layer-graphene.html
Phillips is a bad boy. It does a lot of work behind the scenes and others like Sony take credit for....
Pass the duchy with the qtmm side.
Old post from 2011 courtesy of freegrass
Philips Quantum Dot LED patent assigned
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., and Philips Lumileds Lighting, San Jose, Calif., have been assigned a patent (8,053,972) developed by five co-inventors for a "Quantum dot white and colored light-emitting devices"
A light-emitting device comprising a population of quantum dots (QDs) embedded in a host matrix and a primary light source which causes the QDs to emit secondary light and a method of making such a device. The size distribution of the QDs is chosen to allow light of a particular color to be emitted therefrom. The light emitted from the device may be of either a pure (monochromatic) color, or a mixed (polychromatic) color, and may consist solely of light emitted from the QDs themselves, or of a mixture of light emitted from the QDs and light emitted from the primary source. The QDs desirably are composed of an undoped semiconductor such as CdSe, and may optionally be overcoated to increase photoluminescence.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Light-emitting devices, in particular, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), are ubiquitous to modern display technology. More than 30 billion chips are produced each year and new applications, such as automobile lights and traffic signals, continue to grow. Conventional devices are made from inorganic compound semiconductors, typically AlGaAs (red), AlGaInP (orange-yellow-green), and AlGaTnN (green-blue). These devices emit monochromatic light of a frequency corresponding to the band gap of the compound semiconductor used in the device. Thus, conventional LEDs cannot emit white light, or indeed, light of any “mixed” color, which is composed of a mixture of frequencies. Further, producing an LED even of a particular desired “pure” single-frequency color can be difficult, since excellent control of semiconductor chemistry is required.
Light-emitting devices of mixed colors, and particularly white LEDs, have many potential applications. Consumers would prefer white light in many displays currently having red or green light-emitting devices. White light-emitting devices could be used as light sources with existing color filter technology to produce full color displays. Moreover, the use of white LEDs could lead to lower cost and simpler fabrication than red-green-blue LED technology.
White LEDs are currently made by combining a blue LED with a yellow phosphor to produce white light. However, color control is poor with this technology, since the colors of the LED and the phosphor cannot be varied. This technology also cannot be used to produce light of other mixed colors.
It has been proposed to manufacture white or colored light-emitting devices by combining various derivatives of photoluminescent polymers such as poly(phenylene vinylene) (PPVs). One device that has been proposed involves a PPV coating over a blue GaN LED, where the light from the light-emitting device stimulates emission in the characteristic color of the PPV, so that the observed light is composed of a mixture of the characteristic colors of the device and the PPV. However, the maximum theoretical quantum yield for PPV-based devices is 25%, and the color control is often poor, since organic materials tend to fluoresce in rather wide spectra. Furthermore, PPVs are rather difficult to manufacture reliably, since they are degraded by light, oxygen, and water. Related approaches use blue GaN-based LEDs coated with a thin film of organic dyes, but efficiencies are low (see, for example, Guha et al. (1997) J. Appl. Phys. 82(8):4126-4128; Ill - Vs Review 10(1):4, 1997).
It has also been proposed to produce light-emitting devices of varying colors by the use of quantum dots (QDs). Mattoussi et al. (1998) Appl. Phys. 83:7965-7974; Nakamura et al. (1998) Electronics Lett. 34:2435-2436; Schlamp et al. (1997) J. Appl. Phys. 82:5837-5842; Colvin et al. (1994) Nature 370:354-357. Semiconductor nanocrystallites (i.e., QDs) whose radii are smaller than the bulk exciton Bohr radius constitute a class of materials intermediate between molecular and bulk forms of matter. Quantum confinement of both the electron and hole in all three dimensions leads to an increase in the effective band gap of the material with decreasing crystallite size. Consequently, both the optical absorption and emission of QDs shift to the blue (higher energies) as the size of the QDs gets smaller. It has been found that a CdSe QD, for example, can emit light in any monochromatic color, in which the particular color characteristic of the light emitted is dependent only on the QD's size.
Currently available light-emitting diodes and related devices that incorporate quantum dots use QDs that have been grown epitaxially on a semiconductor layer. This fabrication technique is most suitable for the production of infrared light-emitting devices, but devices in higher-energy colors have not been achieved by this method. Further, the processing costs of epitaxial growth by currently available methods (molecular beam epitaxy and chemical vapor deposition) are quite high. Colloidal production of QDs is a much more inexpensive process, but QDs produced by this method have generally been found to exhibit low quantum efficiencies, and thus have not previously been considered suitable for incorporation into light-emitting devices.
A few proposals have been made for embedding colloidally produced QDs in an electrically conductive layer in order to take advantage of the electroluminescence of these QDs for a light-emitting device. Mattoussi et al. (1998), supra; Nakamura et al. (1998), supra; Schlamp et al. (1997), supra; Colvin et al. (1994), supra. However, such devices require a transparent, electrically conductive host matrix, which severely limits the available materials for producing devices by this method. Available host matrix materials are often themselves light-emitting, which may limit the achievable colors using this method.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
In one aspect, this invention comprises a device, comprising a light source and a population of QDs disposed in a host matrix. The QDs are characterized by a band gap energy smaller than the energy of at least a portion of the light from the light source. The matrix is disposed in a configuration that allows light from the source to pass therethrough. When the QD disposed in the host matrix is irradiated by light from the source, that light causes the QDs to photoluminesce secondary light. The color of the secondary light is a function of the size, size distribution and composition of the QDs.
In one embodiment of this aspect, the QDs comprise a core of CdS, CdSe, CdTe, ZnS, ZnSe, ZnTe, GaAs, GaP, GaAs, GaSb, HgS, HgSe, HgTe, InAs, InP, InSb, AlAs, AlP, AlSb, an alloy thereof, or a mixture thereof, and are, optionally, overcoated with a shell material comprising ZnO, ZnS, ZnSe, ZnTe, CdO, CdS, CdSe, CdTe, MgS, MgSe, GaAs, GaN, GaP, GaAs, GaSb, HgO, HgS, HgSe, HgTe, InAs, InN, InP, InSb, AlAs, AIN, AlP, AlSb, an alloy thereof, or a mixture thereof. Preferably, the band gap energy of the overcoating is greater than that of the core. The core or core-shell QD may be further coated with a material having an affinity for the host matrix. The host matrix may be any polymer, such as polyacrylate, polystyrene, polyimide, polyacrylamide, polyethylene, polyvinyl, poly-diacetylene, polyphenylene-vinylene, polypeptide, polysaccharide, polysulfone, polypyrrole, polyimidazole, polythiophene, polyether, epoxies, silica glass, silica gel, siloxane, polyphosphate, hydrogel, agarose, cellulose, and the like. The primary light source may be a light-emitting diode, a laser, an arc lamp or a black-body light source. The color of the device is determined by the size, size distribution and composition of the QDs. The size distribution may be a random, gradient, monomodal or multimodal and may exhibit one or more narrow peaks. The QDs, for example, may be selected to have no more than a 10% rms deviation in the diameter of the QDs. The light may be of a pure color, or a mixed color, including white.
In a related aspect, the invention comprises a method of producing a device as described above. In this method, a population of QDs is provided, and these QDs are dispersed in a host matrix. A light source is then provided to illuminate the QDs, thereby causing them to photoluminesce light of a color characteristic of their size, size distribution and composition. The QDs may be colloidally produced (i.e., by precipitation and/or growth from solution), and may comprise a core of CdS, CdSe, CdTe, ZnS, ZnSe, ZnTe, GaAs, GaP, GaAs, GaSb, HgS, HgSe, HgTe, InAs, InP, InSb, AlAs, AlP, AlSb, an alloy thereof, or a mixture thereof. The QDs are, optionally, overcoated with a shell material comprising ZnS, ZnSe, ZnTe, CdS, CdSe, CdTe, MgS, MgSe, GaAs, GaP, GaAs, GaSb, HgS, HgSe, HgTe, InAs, InP, InSb, AlAs, AlP, AlSb, an alloy thereof, or a mixture thereof. The host matrix may be any material in which QDs may be dispersed in a configuration in which they may be illuminated by the primary light source. Some examples of host matrix materials include polyacrylate, polystyrene, polyimide, polyacrylamide, polyethylene, polyvinyl, polydiacetylene, polyphenylene-vinylene, polypeptide, polysaccharide, polysulfone, polypyrrole, polyimidazole, polythiophene, polyether, epoxies, silica glass, silica gel, siloxane, polyphosphate, hydrogel, agarose, cellulose, and the like. Any light source capable of causing the QDs to photoluminesce may be used; some examples are light-emitting diodes, lasers, arc lamps and black-body light sources.
It may be desirable to tailor the size distribution of the QDs of a particular core composition to tailor the color of light which is produced by the device. In one embodiment, referred to herein as a “monodisperse size distribution,” the QDs exhibit no more than a 10% rms deviation in diameter. The light may be of a pure color using a monodisperse size distribution of QDs or of a mixed color using a polydisperse size distribution of QDs, including white.
In a further aspect, the invention comprises a QD composition, in which QDs are disposed in a host matrix. The QDs are, optionally, coated with a material having an affinity for the host matrix. When illuminated by a source of light of a higher energy than the band gap energy of the QDs, the QDs photoluminesce in a color characteristic of their size, size distribution and composition.
Phillips mother of all should be called also
Feb 12 2012
Shorts out pounding keyboards with invented numbers...
by teebrane .
A generally bullish signal here, especially when it's infant doing the pounding - did he get that "4 to 1" from a 400 shr ask/ 100 shr bid? He certainly wasn't looking at the modes of MM resistance/support, which was even-steven. Shorts really got creamed on Jan 16. Short shares out from Mid-Jan was 447K (traded by Jan 10, low $10s) went up to 494K on End-Jan (traded Jan 28, low $11s), meaning shorty is having trouble sticking to his guns at a buck higher price on those 50K shares. No wonder they're getting noisy! Whatevs...buy low, sell high, treasure your cash reserved for fighting the CVV Bears, and have the discipline to cash in your trading blocks at a 5-10% profit - since the mood is consolidation/accumulation, the gaps will likely favor the long side. Fibonacci-inspired EMA levels have worked particularly well as buy prices lately - just look at a YTD candlestick chart with EMAs 5, 18 and 13 overlayed (currently, those prices are 11.77, 11.72 and 11.56 - note that we saw support thereabouts yesterday).
2013 is going to be a DAM good year!
Now was going to post some silly video. But I'll hold back
Rocky theme song, perhaps?
Ah yeah $$$
Cha Ching!
Excellent post by tetsuo on stockhouse Feb12 2013
9 - Intangible assets
Purification agreement $1.5m, $1.0m paid, $0.5m payable 31 Jan 2014. Royalty is 5%.
Anode agreement $250k, $175k paid, $75k payable 31 Jan 2014. Royalty is 5%.
Your recent points of attack here are two-fold. Licensing and Progress. What you take as a negative, I take as a positive. It can certainly look very different from where you sit personally. We should probably compare/contrast FMS & NGC on these two critical issues.
Licensing
FMS
Focus announced plans to build facilities in Quebec to purify carbon-as-graphite (Cgr) to battery-grade levels, and to manufacture lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery anodes. This was made possible through a licensing agreement signed with IREQ, the Hydro-Quebec-owned research institute. The IREQ technologies involved in the licensing agreement include spherical shaping, thermal and chemical purification, and the production of Li-ion batteries. Under the agreement, IREQ will provide Focus Metals with support and co-operate in future material and processing improvements. In exchange, Focus Metals will pay IREQ a licensing fee over three years, as well as royalties based on future sales.
IREQ are a global leader in processing technologies, especially in battery anode production, they hold the LiFePO4 cathode patent and the major share of intellectual property worldwide in this area.
Focus are there now, in the mix. Proven technology from the best in the world, immediate industry acceptance, we can hit the ground running. For Focus there is no long term trialling of a new and unknown process, that has no industry acceptance. As for the royalty, I am glad we will pay 5% to IREQ. It means that the interests of FMS and IREQ are aligned. There is an incentive for IREQ to do their very best by Focus, if they want to maximise their royalty revenue. The relationship is symbiotic.
As we know FMS own 40% of Grafoid Inc. Grafoid also has an agreement with Ireq, to develop the next generation of rechargeable batteries using graphene with lithium iron phosphate materials.
So, we look the immediate future with the best current practices and to the likely future of batteries with Graphene (do some research). Are you seriously criticising this approach?
NGC
Northern announced successful bench tests of a new process for purified graphite. It certainly has potential, but it is necessary to read the NR very closely. From Bisset Creek flake they only achieved 99.73%-99.83% purity, this is below the required 99.9%-99.95% for battery specification. It was not suitable for the application intended. Northern did though achieve some production in the range 99.93%-99.99% (eg; some in specification, some not in specification) but they had to make spherical Graphite first, with the associated losses. Losses were lower than traditional losses, as again NGC are trialling a new production method.
So the process has been partly successful. Further work was required, before even getting to a pilot plant stage. As with any new technology, there is no current industry acceptance, therefore the risk is greater. How long to get to a commercial process and to be selling into the market. 2 years, 5 years? By the time NGC get there, the tech could have been superseded by Graphene.
What you fail to see is that Northern cannot use the IREQ technology even if they wanted to. The head grade is so low and the resulting base production costs are so high, that to use the same technology as Focus would mean their end product would be far more expensive due to the initial high costs. Northern are forced to use this strategy, it is not a choice.
Progress
You are always citing how far ahead NGC are compared to FMS. Gary never delivers, yada yada. This all depends how you define progress:
NGC
BFS completed, some permits are in, detailed engineering and design contract has been awarded. This is the typical mine based approach. IMO you could end up with a mine, but no customers to sell any product to. NGC have totally neglected the market elements of the business, as noted in the BFS (recommendations ref; 26.5):
“Northern Graphite will have to provide customers with sample products to confirm quality and suitability for their purposes”. No customer interest or negotiations had been undertaken.
“Such agreements could support Northern Graphite’s financing efforts for the Project”. Hence no financing so far (the finance lease agreement is not financing as expressed here).
“There is no quoted market and research only gave indications as to the size of the premiums were provided. At the time of this Feasibility Study, there was no documentation or agreement supporting the accessibility to this sub-market for the Bissett Creek concentrates of very large flakes and the corresponding prices”. So, no real proof of the often cited Jumbo flake premium then.
The Bisset Creek BFS and low NPV, were wholly based on what a single mill (trying to keep capex costs down) could produce (16,000tpa), with no reference to any customer interest, in any product NGC could produce.
FMS
PEA completed, no permitting submitted, but Terrapex retained. RPA have been looking at mine design and engineering since 2010. NGC probably a little further on re; overall mine planning.
But, Focus have been engaging with potential customers since the start of the process. Their PEA is based on actual expressions of interest, from real customers. This is reflected in a NPV firmly based on those expressions of interest, not simply from planned plant capacity. This is how Focus could project such greater annual production levels.
The expressions of interest covered regular flake graphite, but critically they also covered purified Graphite. You see, customers will know and will have faith in established IREQ processing technology.
This is from the PEA, noted before, but it does read well (ref 19-6):
“Focus has initiated contacts with several major graphite consuming groups in North America, Europe, and Asia. Marketing efforts have been targeted to high value end users requiring superior quality product in terms of flake size and product purity. Production quantities for each major grade category are based on the lock-cycle concentrate production test results and test recovery results from proprietary thermal purification processing (IREQ tech) of the high grade concentrate. Projected overall product volumes and product qualities are detailed in Table 19-3.
TABLE 19-3 PROJECTED PRODUCT MIX
Focus Graphite Inc. – Lac Knife Project
Grade
Tonnage
Purity
Battery Grade
16,900
> 99.95%
Medium Grade
11,200
>90%
Fine Grade 15,500 >80% Cgr, -200 mesh
15,500
>80%
TOTAL
43,600
This also proves something. Battery grade can be achieved using Lac Knife ore to >99.95% purity using the IREQ licensed processes NOW.
The PEA continues:
“The projected product mix is based on expressions of interest received from various potential customers in North America, Europe, and Asia. Potential customers have provided Focus with product quality requirements and projected annual demand. RPA has reviewed these expressions of interest. Multiple product enquiries have been received for the various grades, with total potential demand exceeding the available production limits indicated elsewhere in this report. Focus has provided trial quantities of product to potential customers and has received a positive response from them”.
So in reality who really is further along the road and who is executing their strategy more effectively? Hopefully you will be saved by the NGC share structure
GLTA / DYOR
Go get them Stevie boy!
Go bac
I want to hear/see CEO firsthand. Soon we will.
Dont care about how great dots are anymore i think weve had enough of tgese conversations. i made several investments in nano.
Now which one is the grand slam.
One question please ask for me.
Why did they knock off a name from a company that existed in India?
I look at this one as the underdog. I always liked the underdog. He has to work harder.
I want this to succeed as much as any of you. I read every single post.
Show us where the money's at SS.
Thanks
Don't need the relief to sell.
I was thinking to call the commission itself.
I might pick up the phone and actually call next week.
One my own personal rules I made a long time ago.
I buy and hold and go down with company worst case.
I did
And answer I got was
Our lawyers are looking into it