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.
Brilliant post blanka, thank you
read this article from April 2013. Things have changed - nice big short still out on Nano though.
http://uk.advfn.com/newspaper/charlie-hayter/17979/nanoco-update
I LIKE WHAT YOU DID THERE SOLAR EXPRESS. BE WARNED PPL - THIS BOD IS REALLY AMAZING
Rcranga- have you ever heard of an NDA?
Do you think they meant 05 January - CES??
It is just a bit of educated guesswork but I reeally don't thig DOW has short medium or long term production capability and the whole process is too expensive. We do not know much about the actual committment by LG and Samsung but I think they can only get a small fraction of what they need from DOW. If we are talking about a rapid take up by the Industry then it means volume production so it dramatically lowers the cost of dots. And, Squires says he's got the supply lines worked out. Who else can do it?
I reckon Samsung will be in the frame with QM in the near future. They are less wedded to OLED than LG and if they want to do any more than dip a tiny toe into this market they will be banging on Mr Squires' door. I read somewhere talk of supply chains but I don't see DOW making any more visible attempts to build factories. Call me Hercule Poirot but I think it could happen very soon......
TY Solar Express
I will do some more facts and figures another day, but it does start to look a bit like dreamland.
Right now I'm just pleased that the "Global Freeze" has suddenly thawed - I changed to a new broker and the new one says I can trade!!!
I do not actually think it helps to assess "comparative" value, however I can make a pretty convincing case (at least to myself!) that Nano is worth but a small % of the value of QM if QM manages to win a supply contract. However, the business models are a bit different - for example, takes a 25% royalty from DOW whereas I hope QM can do better than that. I say "hope" because we do not know the terms of the deal with Bayer and since QM does not have a lot of money I would guess Bayer have retained a royalty interest in future production. Also, Nano can only be valued on its own limited production capability. My perspective is that DOW is (or was) important to manufacturers for early proof of concept designs, but I would be surprised if it can take things much further itself to the exclusion of other major suppliers......
Nano got the tie up with DOW because back in early 2013 it was the only mass production method for cadmium free dots (HMF). So far as I know QM is not yet advertising itself as a mass producer of HMF dots, but since mid-2014 they can be developed under the Bayer patent. So that explains why QM is valued at roughly one-tenth of Nano rght now.
At the time DOW committed to build the factory the EU Reglatory exemption was due to end, but now with the partial exemption to 2017 having been granted IMO QM is well positioned to (at least) fill a production gap. QM promises to deliver a bigger + faster ramp-up of production, and I would expect this to attract considerable interest, especially if HMF dots can be perfected.
Merry Christmas
ok thank you , found it now.
ps. I don't need convincing on QM as I have already made a few +ve conclusions .
price alert>hide sticky>(i)show intro
-------
What is this meant to be?
Hi solar
where is that meant to take me? I cant see what you mean sorry
One line above Moderators far right side click [(i)show intro] 1000's of hours of DD..
------------
Sorry, don't understand you.
what did you think I said solar E, were you not listening to me?
Hi chessmite
You said:-
"The efficiencies of NHM qds aren't up to par with CdSe tqds as of this time."
Can you say more, about the relative performance capability and why you believe this is true?
Thanks
JB
including high yield InP/ZnS nanocrystals, a heavily researched QD in high demand in optoelectronics.
-------------
((From the Bayer patent news release)
Can anyone decipher the scientific jargon above for me please?
Thanks
Dms
I agree. This is far the most likely reason for down pressure. The market is awash. A good opportunity for long term investors. This is normal risk and will keep happening until a deal comes along.
JB
Apology to J45 for calling names. I got annoyed there. Let's move on, please.
Maybe you could all stop and think a bit first.
I told you that I am based in the UK. I have never invested in the US or tried to do that until Monday. I do not work in financial services and I am not an accountant. 2 days ago, I had never heard of an 8k or a 10k. I read it was not an audited account and that's what I thought!
I also thought this might be a place to learn something about the IP but why not just carry on your overly sensitive attacks please.
I made a very public admission on this BB that I think it is a good idea to invest in BOTH companies, if you believe in the future of QD materials tech, which I most certainly do.
I think it is dishonest for anyone to pretend that BOTH companies cannot fail spectacularly.
Hi BigE1960
That's really not much comfort though, is it? The company is just saying you have to believe them, but equally it would not cost a lot to get an audit and they supposedly weighed that up against the negative PR not doing it would bring. Bad choice, so I do find it a bit odd to be honest.... It is certainly the main reason you do not have much new investment going into this. Maybe the Directors want that? It does not affect the outcome in the end, it will either succeed or fail like many others (incl Nano), but as I said, they are running it like a private company.
I have said my bit and will leave it there.
QM has great IP for sure and that's why I will keep following.
GL.
j45
Nope, the first thing I found was this message board, so whatever! Lucky me!
But anyway, the accounts say on their face that they are NOT audited so anyone can read that for themselves. Nobody should invest in this if they do not trust the Board and have a high tolerance of risk. You cannot SERIOUSLY dispute that without losing ALL credibility.
Any my broker was told they will NOT let me buy - he tried two different US counter-parties who would not go near it, even though it is my risk. I have no clue why. He speculated on some reasons and of course the accounts do not look pretty but it is really of no interest to me now.
GL with your investments.
Thanks for the tips guys. I've also now seen a couple of private messages which I cannot reply to, except for one of you in "free time" - I will try to do this at what must be 9pm here on Friday?
Yes I bought Nano, but only this week. I have followed it for about two years so I have a good perspective on things from a different angle, which you guys might benefit from if you really want to make money (like I do) - for example the DOW plans and capabilities.
I am NOT saying that Nano is great and this stock is rubbish, so please dispense with that idea. The market is evolving rapidly and it all needs to be worked out. There will be winners and losers, and possibly several winners. I wanted to cover more than one base, but unfortunately what will be will be - I STILL cannot trade this and I am not entirely happy with the reasons for that, but also too, the risks are obviously high for anyone investing here - unaudited accounts and lack of money for a start.
If it has backers then it will succeed, and it has survived that way so far, but it is being run much like a private company would be run. I just happen to think it is an attractive gamble.
One other thing, IF QM does NOT succeed then NANO will be a much more attractive investment in my view. Talk is to allow US trading and a move to main listing soon. Don't rule it out if you believe in the tech.
No-one can judge any of this yet
There hs been a long lead in to the Korean factory, which was significantly delayed. Where was this process 2 years ago?
Hi J45
What is IBOX please?
THANKS AGAIN. Ok so this is the bit that interests me:-
Looking beyond this achievement, Quantum Materials Corp. Chairman and CEO Stephen B. Squires stated that “Quantum Materials’ next larger system, expected to be rapidly deployed later this year, will place us far ahead of the competition in the ability to supply reliable industrial quantities of quantum dots. We plan to quadruple production output by January 15, 2015, and have engineered plans in place to deploy short-lead-time parallel systems to meet ever increasing market demand.”
SO:-
next larger system, expected to be rapidly deployed later this year,...... NOT COME IN YET BUT SOON?
We plan to quadruple production output by January 15, 2015, and have engineered plans in place to deploy short-lead-time parallel systems to meet ever increasing market demand.” THIS WILL PUT IT LEVEL WITH NANO IN SCALE OF PRODUCTION.
They just need to sort this out then perfect the NHM dots IMO
Lastly.....
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/viewer?action=view&cik=1403570&accession_number=0001013762-14-001247&xbrl_type=v#
Is this where to find the $3m figure as I still cant see it.
ok so the automated equipment is paid for. Is this delivered or will it come when the Star Park lab is ready in mid-2015? Or is that lab expansion for something different entirely?
Sorry for asking so many questions.
I saw the debate on cadmium free - what did we conclude? Are the QM ones now ready.... or not? Or is it that they are just not up to full optimisation? Perhaps that is the reason for lagging behind DOW/Nano right now?
However, after yesterday's news I don't think the following line from the QM November 5, 2014 press release is supportable:-
Industry research has shown NHM quantum dots to be environmentally friendly but have yet to demonstrate NHM quantum dots of a quality, quantity, reliability and price necessary to justify industrial production. The company believes these problems will be overcome with our current intellectual property, automated processes and top scientific personnel.
Thanks DDH and Kinaree,
On the patent, any reason to think it would be denied?
Yes, I'm quite angry on not holding this yet as I set up the advisory broker especially for that trade and they came back with nothing. And now, the price is 2c up!! Simply marvellous, eh?
I take the view that the company would have failed if it was going nowhere (it isn't IMO). So I am not worried about the funding except for knowing the precise terms.
It would be nice to get a deal in the bag before any big dilution. On AIM in the UK retail investors always get screwed so I am expecting that would happen here too (like Nano) even though there should be big profits and no reason to inflict unnecessary pain on the retail investors.
Maybe it will get cheaper first, who knows? I am usually unlucky but here's hoping!
JB
must have missed that when I re-read it, so thanks.
I will try another broker!
I am excited by this company even though Nano has done some deals, and I wonder why it has got in front of QM? Why is this company playing catch up? Are the manufacturers waiting on the patent to be sorted before committing? It is hard to see how the market demand for QD will be met if QM does not succeed.
ps.
I thought the $3,000,0000 was mentioned in the filing but must have picked it up from another source - no idea where I read it but it is an issue if anyone here has actually read the accounts (I have folks)
Thanks BIG E -
I don't know which patent but I was most concerned about the automated production process being fully protected - is it? I have read articles saying opposite things.
The filing suggested the immediate money situation is dire. What do you think?
What do you think of Nano. I am already in that one but I think the best way to play this market is to cover both stocks.
And, whatever anyone here thinks, I was not permitted to buy stock because of the "global freeze". Yes I also thought that was laughable but it is the truth and I am just accused of lying. What nonsense!
Short covering would be a possibility I suppose?
JB
Outstanding points which can someone please help me answer:-
- it says the production process is only patent pending so when do you expect it will be granted?
- $3,000,000 funding is needed - what are the expectations now; will it be soon?
- Why is the Bayer IP deal private? I presume they will get a sizeable stake in the company if it has not been paid outright.
Thanks
DOW cannot hope to meet the full scale of industry demand, so who is doing that, or who will do that?
My guess is that there will be a somewhat limited roll-out up to the EU Regulatory change unless someone else can fill the production gap, which is something like 5 times greater than what DOW can hope to supply.
DOW pay NANO a 25% royalty too, but as I understand it QMC could do things without a JV partner and pocket the lot?
This also gives time to refine the cadmium free dots, which some of you guys think needs to happen. As I understood it though Nano's dots were already good to go.....
The broker referred to it as a "global freeze". He had never ever come across the situation before. I took it to mean either very good or very bad news (Who is the de-ramper who keeps posting stuff?). My broker also said there are sell orders out for as little as 0.3c and 0.6c (??), so this stock seems to have very little in terms of tradable market.
However, it seems that you folks can trade ok? The market cap is quite subdued here, which is very strange if you compare it to Nano which is in much the same boat and trading at about $400m equivalent. I actually think QMC is a better positioned, so what am I missing?
My take on this (from across the pond)is that DOW cannot possibly cope with all the expected demand from the Korean factory. It has to be supplied from somewhere. Also, I was not allowed to buy stock in QMC today. Any reason why it is "frozen"?