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.
There was an announcement from a British company recently (based in Preston I think) which has come up with some process technology which enables volume production of cheap film for the first time, apparently. Unfortunately I cannot seem to re-locate the article. It was in the last month.
JB
Yes it was a mistake and this can only be good news.
The new guy comes in and is doing a thorough audit job. All dusted down and ready for the NASDAQ listing in due course.
Anyone care to guess at the $19 trillion industry that will kill the Internet?
Good find Big E. The publicity can do no harm.
Reduce but not eliminate? A big difference so which is it?
I like this bit:-
As you’d expect, companies making film-based and tube-based solutions are touting each approach as superior. QD Vision claims its tube-based approach is easier and cheaper to implement, and it can boost the color performance of cheaper edge-lit LCD sets. According to QD Vision, the oxygen-barrier film needed for film-based dots is costly, which explains why Nanoco and Nanosys are partnering with Dow and 3M for that film.
Film-based suppliers say their method has the upper hand due to “light coupling,” or the ability to feed all that quantum-dot light directly into a light-guide plate. The film layer also purportedly works better with full-array backlight systems, which will be used in a lot of UHD and HDR TVs.
Excellent, thanks SE. Is this QTMM's current presentation used for SID Display Week?
How does one equate 'batch process' with 'molecular seeding'? This is what Nanoco say on their website:-
Mass Production
Nanoco has patented a unique technology for high volume production
Nanoco’s patented ‘molecular seeding’ process allows for the production of uniform, high quality quantum dots on a large scale.
Nanoco continues to expand its Semi-Tech production capacity to meet the increasing testing and sampling requirements of its customer base.
In January 2013, Nanoco announced that the company had signed a global, exclusive license deal with Dow
Talking of rain does anyone know how it's looking in East Texas?
"We have optimized" suggests maybe a third party has accepted this fact, however, "we expect.....will reduce" does not suggest any deal has been done. It's better not to read too much given that any jv announcement would be subject to pr anyway.
X27RAY is right IMO because there is no mention of manufacturing, products, partners etc.... Hope I am very wrong but I'm not reading anything into it. The additional detail will be very interesting whatever happens though.
Agree with you 100% dms. All the other stuff is language I don't understand. MMs don't usually play games like most people seem to think. This is a share waiting for news with low daily volumes. An RNS changes everything. I believe it will come but if I was playing the $1 game it would be Jan 2016.
Can anyone local comment on the current weather situation in Polk County and Tyler County? This has been hampering efforts to get a rig set up for exploration drilling.
Thanks
http://www.displayweek.org
Flyer talks of nearly 400 oral and poster presentations so don't expect QTMM are being spoken for. They've probably got an oral presentation.
Hmmmmmm. I note they are making a distinction between cadmium free and heavy metal free although there is no consistent use of terminology. I believe Nanoco use indium though I am uncertain if it is Indium phosphide or something else, but this is a heavy metal too, is it not? The recent UbiQD article made the point about indium maybe being added to the EU banned list at some stage. Any thoughts on this?
This is positive news on the whole as a small number of companies can manufacture this way, patents kick in, and also QTMM can produce QD supply for testing more quickly and cheaply than others. It can ramp up that capacity at relatively less cost than DOW, and with a locational advantage in where it places those reactors. IMO we are going to hit the big time one of these days.
The question is, are we any further ahead? They use the word sale, so by my reckoning we must be selling too not giving it away?
----------------
The company finalized its licensing deals with LANL and MIT this month, and it’s now producing quantum dots for sale to researchers at laboratories and companies for them to experiment with potential applications.
“We can make it for less than $30 per gram if we sell it at volume, compared to others who produce it at more than three times that cost,” McDaniel said. “We’re making and shipping stuff now. We’ve entered into agreements with a few companies, but I can’t name them yet.”
Let's say Samsung can already make enough of their own but prefer to use cadmium as it is better / cheaper. It would not be in the interests of Samsung to reveal how it intends to source its supply ahead of any EU vote, which is finely balanced in my view - but those wishing to extend the ban are going to need to put up a better case than they have until now - with evidence. One possible outcome is that the EU will need to revisit the strict terms of the proposed extension.
So maybe DOW only get Samusung to sign up if the vote is in its favour?
Does this affect QTMM either way....? Maybe not.
Possibly inaccurate - referring to early Nanoco supplied dots (Runcorn factory) for prototype TV's. However, still no word on Samsung singing up, so I am undecided.
We've got the same script writer!
http://qsinano.com/products/
Leveraging our patented, automated, highly scalable, and environmentally safe Gas Phase Condensation (GPC) process, we manufacture a number of high-quality metals, bi-metallic alloys, and catalysts at the nanoscale including Iron, Silver, Copper, Nickel, and Manganese. We also offer custom dispersions and several specialty metals and catalysts including Gold, Palladium, Aluminum, and Tin.
We currently have 18 dedicated reactors and a manufacturing facility capacity of several hundred kilos per month. Based on demand, we are able to quickly scale and adjust production runs to satisfy our customers’ advanced material needs and delivery timelines.
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jnt/2014/324089/#B29
Nanocatalysis: Academic Discipline and Industrial Realities
For their study, they compared the ability of tetrahedral, cubic, and “near spherical” particles to catalyze the reaction of hexacyanoferrate (III) and thiosulfate ions and found that the catalytic activity correlates with the amount of atoms at corners and edges. Therefore, although having the same size, tetrahedral particles—featuring a larger amount of edges and corners—are considerably more active than spherical ones.
This may help with number 2!
http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2014/08/difference-engine-2
I think it is fairly obvious there is no current contract but QTMM is aligning itself to cash in - most probably this will be during 2016, and not any earlier, IMO. Here's something new though:-
"In addition to the display market, which has the most press coverage at the moment, there are a number of quantum dot applications that are beginning commercialization due to the automated mass-production and economies of scale Quantum Materials can provide. For example, we are dedicating a program for mass-production of industry-specific uniform nano-size catalysts for the automotive and broader combustion-related industries. “
Blows Nanoco out of the water on current valuation, doesn't it?
Nanosys seems to be saying that our time will come too as the market matures. For those of you betting on Q2 2015 it might be a long wait!
------
In terms of adoption, I think what we are seeing is an inflection year in 2015 where Quantum Dots are being introduced into premium products at the top of the TV market first. Going forward, in 2016 and beyond, we will start to see Quantum Dots working their way across the entire market
I'll make this my final plea -
I am not denying your opinion. I said why not one use one email post rather than clogging up the board?
You seem to want an argument, and it comes across as petty and childish I'm afraid.
I am not looking for an argument. It was a simple, polite request. That's my final word so thanks for acknowledging, and assuming your response will be unchanged I had better say farewell and GL to everyone now.
GLA
JB
People here should only really be interested in material directly relevant to their investment which means news on QTMM, and news on their target market, and their direct competitors (i.e. other dot makers).
None of the links you have posted are even remotely relevant to the investment case. It is possible to get enough of that by subscribing to news on a website like "Great Things from Small Things .. Nanotechnology Innovation"
I'm sure you will disagree - but if so, why not one email to make viewing the Board easier?
I think you are trying to make a childish point, and succeeded, but maybe enough now?
I can just stop reading this BB if I have to, but that would be a pity as there are lots of good posts and not too much garbage.
Thanks
JB
Hi Chessmite
Just a plea to ask if you can please consolidate your stream of research posts to a single post (with email links) in future?
This will make viewing posts much easier. At the moment it is becoming a bit too time consuming and making this site less enjoyable to use.
Thanks for listening.
JB
Dockzef- which picture are you describing please?
Interesting. I have always thought DOW/ Nanoco process was expensive, and that QTMM can do it cheaper. I'd like this stated publicly.
If it was just a case of Nanoco/DOW asking for a little too much from Samsung then they could have reduced the price, but no, they lost the deal entirely. The margins cannot be great when DOW has spent the current market cap of Nanoco on setting up a single factory.
I get the impression that dot quality is a moving feast too so QTMM could be ahead there to (the PR indicates that it is certainly).
Let the good times roll!
Partner relationships- presume this is a JV arrangement as per 10k aspiration.
Capital structure - placing? any other ideas? (open question)
Good news and more tangible evidence to suggest something is already happening here.
Wow that's a lot of articles. I don't think many (any?) are relevant to my investment here but 10 out of 10 for sheer enthusiasm and effort. We got scientists all over the world working on nano tech so I shall look forward to a bunch more
All boats will rise in the new dawn - commercialisation of QD.
The main competition in HMF dots has today announced a move to main market and placing at 24% discount. Of course it is relevant. You decide if it is positive or negative.
You also do it if you have to do it in order to stay in the game. If a company appears too small to be relevant then people ignore it. If it is set up to go it is not so easy to ignore. I think it has a lot to do with market perception and credibility, because manufacturers and potential customers would be right to view it as a lab tech company and say "show me you can do it". That's why Naoco teamed up with DOW. There was no contract there either. QTMM is coming late but is doing the right things now - hence the recent PR that the co. had either met or exceeded the requirements of the leading manfacturers. Someone will be able to post a link hopefully.
Personally i dont see why manufacturers would chose not to turn to QTMM if it can do what it says. It still suggests to me there is nothing concrete and guaranteed though, unfortunately.
In terms of progress here When are we getting some PR for the Star Park expansion and new reactor operating? Soon I hope. GLA
Interesting article re- cost of labour and increasing use of automation in factories:-
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20150327PD202.html?mod=2
Yes SE but London Manchester derby!?
They are nowhere near and London is not a team! I get your drift though
I don't disagree but it is when, or IF, the commercial threshold is reached. That is ultimately the risk of investing now, and why some people would choose to call it a POS (positive opportunity stock)
err.... which derby are you referring to SE?
Nanoco is currently rated at approx 10-12x forecast profits for 2017, with no significant revenue occuring until 2016 so plenty could go wrong. I would much rather be invested in a company with the same prospects (or better) at a tenth of the value. Isn't that the way to succeed with investing - buy low sell high!? Plus until Jan '15 Nanoco did not have any contracts to announce either. And Samsung must be a worry - it was always thought to be in the bag.