I think DOW going with Nanoco was a positive sign in regards to the fact that a major chemical manufacturer gave QDs a "stamp of approval". I don't think Dow knew a ton about QDs specifically, but they knew enough to know that they'd be a hot commodity. Nanosys and QDV had clearly stated they intended to manufacture themselves, so they went with Nanoco (at least thats my interpretation on it). It's probably also similar to how Nanosys licensed their tech to Samsung/Hansol. You can't produce as much as you'd like at that given time so you at least make some revenue on your tech. Nanoco's Runcorn facility doesn't have the ability to produce at massive production scales, so they signed with Dow to make revenues on their tech without the costs of labor, etc.
I reference Nanoco's performance based on a spectra Nanosys showed at the 2015 QD Forum (the video is on youtube). They took a spectra from the LG TV using Nanoco's dots (assume they were using their best dots in a demo). The spectra was awful compared to the Samsung spectra and the other TV using Nanosys dots. Yes, obviously Nanosys isn't going to show something that makes themselves look bad, but that spectra, coupled with the fact that huge companies like AUO, TCL, Hisense are all going with them makes me think they probably DO have the best dots. I don't think their Hyperion dots are out of favor. They said in their PR for it that they'd be sampled in Q3 of 2016 and be available for mass production Q1 next year. If those take off it really could be bad for everyone else in the industry because there is no threat of RoHS anymore...
What I'd honestly like QMC to do is give shareholders a demo. YEARS before QD tvs hit the market there were at least demos out at trade shows. No one is asking QMC to have a completely finished product, but it'd go along way to showing you're a serious player in the market if they had a TV retrofitted with their dots.
EDIT: In regards to your latest post I do believe that the actual film aspect is the largest hold up. That's why I don't read too much into QMCs 225k. From what I've been reading through the last 3 years is that there's an incredible amount of R&D that goes into incorporating QDs into film, while also keeping their performance levels high). You aren't accomplishing that on 225k, and if the argument is that QMC is giving dots away that's terrible business if your sole business model is supplying the dots... In regards to your quote about energy saving I think it's basically saying that the yield from Cd dots is higher than Cd-free (ie if you shoot 100 photons into a QD you're getting 95 out with Cd and 75 with Cd-free, hence the performance gap that everyone talks about) What really keeps me around is I want to see how the industry develops (will there be one main go-to supplier for displays who basically monopolizes the field, or will multiple companies end up getting a share of the pie?).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
