Enig med deg @SuperTechInfo 
Har også sett intervjuet, og tenker din oppsummering er veldig spot on.
1 Like
Some new changes to employees observed and the conclusion is the same, that the deep tech related and employees with highest education are being kept. Application Engineering is related to computer simulations software and last years one other position in this field ended.
1: Group Controller now taking role as Finance Director (the new temp CFO?)
2: Application Engineering Manager is now “opentowork” (position probably ended and just got a recommendation from other employee which is typical).
3: Business Analyst quitting (position probably ended, older employees expressing relief of new job).
4: The new CEO has the following job description stating responsibility for a lot including specifically attaching “investor relations” and “restructuring” as skills for the Crayonano position.
Full balance sheet responsibility for early stage revenue tech scale-up with ~35 head counts and reporting line to the board of directors. Direct responsibility for finance, investor relations / capital raising / equity story as well as technology development, having direct reports for operations and sales&marketing.
1 Like
Takk for oppsummering og deling.
–
3 Likes
Record high, hva vil det si egentlig ?
Iallfall mer enn i mai, og da ble denne meldt: https://crayonano.com/news/crayonano-announces-volume-delivery-to-a-key-uv-c-led-water-disinfection-customer
Men ikke noe tall å forholde seg til
Det er nok salg til Hergy eller AquiSense, eller begge. Håper de blir fast leverandør til AquiSense, de ser ut til å ha noe bra på gang.
It looks like they are increasing the buzz, at the same time, when stated they are in processes with industrial strategic long-term investors.
It might be parallel buzz/marketing when in negotiations with new investors, however they wont be able to negotiate without exclusive term sheet, and that term sheet also restricts what can be published.
I would see increased buzz as not a good sign when communicating the company being in process with securing long-term capital from strategic industrial investors. If the discussion are progressing great, no buzz needed.
If this is a play before IPOing, could be, but unlikely.
1 159 261 preference shares a 14,- = 16,2 MNOK
This financing round positions us to implement our commercial strategies effectively and prepare for the next funding round at a valuation no less than the previous one.
1 Like
Some complain when there are no buzz, some complain when there is buzz 
I really cannot se anything wrong with this tweet that is barely stating facts we all knew before.
Det er berettiget å stille spørsmål om denne meldingen på linkedin, når informasjonen er ca 2 måneder gammel. For meg er det useriøst å skrive om gammelt info på nytt
2 Likes
Kapitalhevingen ble fullført 15. juli, og siden den tid har de fleste vært i feriemodus. Nei, jeg klarer ikke å se hvorfor man skal stille spørsmål rundt dette.
1 Like
Now its official, CTO has ended the position, in addition to CFO previously mentioned. Both CTO and CFO are now removed from the webpage. The new CEO arranged this the first month making an agreement letting go of these positions, documented in the “not so public” prospectus that was made for the repair emission.
The question that remains now is something people should offer some thoughts on in context with teasing article about “ready for stock exchange” and posting about the small repair emission from July on the LinkedIn page as something major.
What is happening?
-
Deep tech semiconductor companies going public without CTO and CFO?
Is it really going public now despite the teasing article? -
Is this really just an extreme reduction in costs with the remaining employees taking on more work, and the there will be no new CTO or and CFO?
-
Or is it what every stockholder want, preparations for being acquired, hence removing obsolete positions not needed?
As of now the company has no CTO and CFO.
Man kan velge å se dette på flere måter, da helst farget av eget ståsted/håp.
Personlig synes jeg (selvsagt!) at det er både korrekt og naturlig at de kunngjør nye ordre/leveranser, samt at den famøse emisjonen og kapitalen derfra er registrert.
Hvordan og hvor slike kunngjøringer skal gjøres, er et problem, men det visste vi jo at det ville være.
Realiteten er jo uansett at det ikke finnes noen “proper channels” (ref Super Techinfo) når nyheter skal publiseres etter at de trer ut av NOTC.
Formen på disse kunngjøringene er ikke i min smak, til det er det blandet inn for mye selvskryt og ren markedsføring som gjør at det kliniske budskapet; altså nyheten, drukner.
Det er også vanskelig å forstå hvorfor ordrenes størrelse og kunden(es) navn må holdes hemmelig; det refereres stadig til samtaler og forespørsler fra flere mer eller mindre store aktører, både i form av kunder så vel som investorer; altså lite som tyder på at det foreligger avtaler med eksklusivitets-klausuler.
Det som virkelig betyr noe for investorer (inkl. oss), er utviklingen av Gen. 2, og om dette hører vi nada.
Det er også vanskelig å se at det er rom for særlig mye teknologi-utvikling i den kapital-tilførselen de fikk nå; det er vel ikke mer enn til å holde hodet over vannet selv med den ned-strippede organisasjonen.
Altså foreligger det kun et par reelle alternativer:
- Ny emisjon snarest (til en minst like høy pris (NOK 14) som sist)
- Salg av hele eller deler av selskapet
Den litt desperate markedsføringen de har lagt inn via diverse medier nå, kan jo tyde på begge deler.
Men som flere sier; om selskapet var attraktivt for overtagelse, så hadde nok det skjedd for lenge siden
En annen betraktning/undring; hvordan vil de føre den utlovede 3-doblede kompensasjonen per preferanseaksje i regnskapene; det må vel føres som gjeld i en eller annen form?
En ting er sikker; vi får kanskje (ikke?) svarene en eller annen gang 
1 Like
Ekstra-kompensasjonen for preferanseaksjene er ikke en forpliktelse som ligger på selskapet. Det er en skjevdeling av et framtidig utbytte, og ikke noen gjeldspost for selskapet.
Steg for steg. Enten følger du ikke med, eller så har du allerede glemt følgende;
"We are targeting to implement a significant step forward on reducing the price-performance parameter by 50% by 2025 to enable our customers a competitive advantage with better return on investment of their products in the market, as well as access to price-sensitive high-volume applications in home appliances and industrial disinfection applications. The development of significant cost reductions by maintaining quality and performance requires an evolution of the UV-C LED chip-, packaging-, and assembly technology and is related to a planned new product introduction . "
2 Likes
Traditionally, LinkedIn is used by companies to showcase product updates, partnerships, and major milestones rather than day-to-day financial activities or short-term funding. Shareholders may see this post as a deviation from the norm, especially for a company that’s been around for as long as CrayoNano.
As a 14-year-old company, CrayoNano’s communication should ideally reflect its maturity and established presence. Overemphasizing minor funding events might give an impression that the company is more in need of short-term solutions than long-term strategic planning.
They might want to assure investors, customers, and partners that they are actively securing funding, even if it’s just a short-term solution or could be trying to reach new investors or stakeholders who might not be familiar with the company’s financial health.
It is confusing and the update clearly is a risk in my opinion, making the company seem more vulnerable. All other relevant finance info has been delivered though annual reports, and updates on webpages, and this announcement of short-term funding is kind of annoying, and make me wonder why are the topic still short-term funding, where are the announcements of the industrial strategic investors?
As more buzz is created and combined with this new channel does not feel good. The update is not giving any new info, no feel good.
I think this is to assure customers, partners somehow etc at the same time, and decided to use LinkedIn instead of 1-to-1 communications. If in talks with strategic investors, this update could be delivered in the meeting room or video call.
To all shareholders in here: Urging people to come up with any thoughts/explanations on this.