I see Samsung are gaining traction with their quantum dot TV's. The many other TV manufacturers better get a move on or they will be left behind in the HDTV market. Regular phosphors can't match QD quality and remember QD's still at an early stage. Lots of room for improvement in spec. Samsung cadmium free so not a risk of being banned in Europe in the next 12 months. Samsung will need a lot more Dots from somewhere. Even Dow's multi-million dollar factory will be hard pressed to meet the 72 tonne anticipated demand by 2020. Samsung read ..[link]
No good producing 2.25 tonnes a year if you don't have anyone to sell to. Nanosys, Nano and QD vision all got buyers. QTMM pissing in the wind and not investible until that changes. Interesting latest patent by Nano and Nigel Pickett. Nano spelling out their cadmium free chemistry and closing the door on copycats. More than 10 years since they came up with cad free. The rest running to catch up but with Dow accelerating the advantage it's going to be difficult limo....[link]
I thought this was a Nanoco thread. Why is every second post a plug for QTMM: A company with no orders, no products and no IP of its own. To say they can produce two tonnes of cadmium free quantum dots in a glib way is bordering on the insane. I thought this was a better thread than advfn but I see its full of the same self-interested nonsense ... adios...!!
QTMM do not even own their IP ... it's licensed from Grice university. Wouldn't go near it with a barge pole, however Nanosys and QD vision seem quality companies with a client base and products. Though nanosys did tell a few porkies in Jan about the Samsung deal and QD vision haven't been completely straight on the EU exemption. I don't like companies that do that. Belief in management is the only thing we can go off until earnings start arriving imo.....
But it has de-risked massively since it was £1.90 two years ago. We now have a factory, clients and a market both in display and LED. Plus the cadmium QD option in Europe has been kicked into touch. The exemption will be gone in about 12 months imo.
Remember QMatials has form with its shipping statements. I recall this negative article from a few years back when they were saying the same thing... “shipped Tetrapod Quantum Dots in sample quantities to a diversified leading Asian-based electronics manufacturer' [link] I think you need to ask why QM have been unsuccessful with cadmium QDots before you can assume they will be successful with cadmium free Qdots. Anyway, I don't mean to criticise too much just when posters don't do their research and assume just because Qm make a statement it's bound to be true. Which is why I prefer Nano's minimal statements as a longer term investor in value.
Also re quantum materials, strange that Merck decided to buy Qlight Nanotech Ltd, a cadmium producing Qdot company. You would have thought that quantum materials at a market cap of around £30 million would have been a better option. £30 million is small change for Merck and for a company who claims that their reactors can supply the who industry of some 5 billion plus in a few years. They've obviously missed a huge bargain not going for quantum materials....
Quantum materials still don't have any clients or products. Nanosys and QD vision do. I would take the latter much more seriously. Note there was a new broker comment from Liberum on Friday saying that Nano have 3 OEM clients in the display sector. That's fantastic news. No wonder runcorn have recruited so many scale up chemists and production staff. The factory's ready to go, major clients in display plus the start of QDot LEDs with Marl. If Osram come on board there will probably be the need for another kilo lab to supply the lighting sector. Going to be a great year for Nano imo...
Sorry chaps, but you need to understand quality and integrity. Nano are a class act. Their science came out of Manchester Uni and the people that progressed the science. Passion will always win out....