- Det samme som de har vist til på tidligere presentasjoner i år.
Det er nok fortsatt 1. gen. antar jeg, men antakeligvis med bedre ytelse og lavere pris.
Man kan jo håpe at produktet er såpass bra at det gjør noe med investeringslysten.
2 Likes
For those who were able to attend:
1) Any screenshots taken of any presentation slides?
2) Still confirming new product launch Q4/EO24 (ref previously stated industry outperforming device with 50% improvement in cost/performance).
Question #1: Any enlightenment of this new product being based on gen2 platform with nanowires, or are we still actually at no new info on nanowires despite actually talking about new product in a general assembly?
Question #2: If no, did any ask about this specifically?
3) What happened with a previously mentioned investor and something about Nasdaq?
4) What is status on delisting from NOTC, why is it still pending despite voted (is it connected to pt 3?)
My thoughts; The company now have all mandates to delist, raise money in any form and even be acquired. For all we know the plan is to be acquired, and anything can happen, anytime.
#1 No Information whether this product is based on gen. 2. Dobbertin seemed to be excited about this launch tho.
They admitted technical difficulties related to gen. 2 as an explenation to why they are delayed according to the roadmap.
- My understanding is that there were at least two interested investors. The Nasdaq case was a merge
The company wants to invest more resources on R&D in Asia.
The product is to expensive for China yet…
CoFounder did question the wide mandate regarding resolution 6.
Har snakket med flere ganske store aksjonærer i etterkant av EGM. En fikk ikke være med i dag fordi de var 2 min over tidsfristen. Felles for alle er at de har null tillit til selskapet. Det gjør det spesielt vanskelig at punkt 6 ble stemt igjennom. At dette kommer til å ende med noe som er svært lite hyggelig for vanlige aksjonærer føler jeg meg ganske sikker på dessverre. Og det tror jeg har med punkt 6 å gjøre.
For sen til å logge på eller for sen til påmelding på mandag?
Påmelding
It is on time to say that that previous CEO and now chairman Jo Uthus has held both positions over a long time and his behavior stands today to disgrace. His take on these roles are very disappointing, especially combined with his personality. It he is condescending towards shareholders, even today when he is put in the spotlight. I understand companies must guard their very inner workings on trade secrets and some details around strategies, but in this case we have seen a blatant refusal to comment on the tech and product roadmap over several year (also called guiding), and the outcome is just to disregard any comments and state it will take a couple of years more.
The company identity is still very visible and built around the patented deep-tech that no competitors are close to, and we are not saying it doesnt exists, but in which form is not possible to obtain information.
If the plan is to obtain new competent and professional investors they will demand information and status on the core technology. They would need waterproof NDAs to be even able to enter such discussions. This means potential investors will get more information about the tech than shareholders, and thats the irony, but however how it works.
There has been some speculation earlier if the company even are actually reaching out to industry investors or competitors, with the the speculation on the story around the tech. If they are not willing to approach such investors to show the status, they will need to approach broader investor base that dont ask such questions. Hence, it will be very interesting to what kind of investors who might join, because it will be a tell tell sign.
The story about the prospects of the two investor-processes and the possible Nasdaq-merge, especially if the latter if true, could be a very good indicator however, but impossible to verify. In light of the still reluctance of informing about the main story, the main marketing, the main identity, which is the main novel patented technology. As long as we dont hear anything about it, we cannot do anything.
They delivered pretty detailed info in 2022, saying release in 2023-2024, and the investor presentation with the roadmap from April 2023 also restated gen2 “full nanowire” towards 2024. Now given zero reasons and 2-3 years needed tech development.
Crayonano has gotten so much PR/media and talk the last 12 years, it is really hard to understand, if this is just tactics.
I would say its highly possible the company might be sold anytime if the offer is okey.
Remember most investors have 14-16 per share based on previous capital raises.
If you are investor (or wondering) in Ascenium where Jo Uthus is CEO, you should follow closely to what kind of investors who would join. A tell tell sign are Norwegian companies only raising capital from rich individuals with very limited understanding of the cases, the same crowd and then hypetrain.
3 Likes
Helt på linje med det som er skrevet. Kjenner på en følelse jeg ikke har kjent på med noen andre investeringer. Utrolig provoserende å bli lurt og den stilen Jo Uthus inntar her er nesten ikke til å holde ut. Han har ikke ønsket å gå i dialog på lang tid, lar Rune Rinnan tar seg av det heller. Jo Uthus har slik jeg ser det basert seg på løgn og bedrag over lang tid nå. Finnes det en måte dette kan då følger på for han ?
I have very strong indications that the technology platform is very unique with a lot of future potential. That standing point protected by patents is valuable for many actors. Remember they have patents for the process of growing any semiconductor on graphene, for these UV-C LEDs its mainly use of layers of GaN and AlGaN, GaN is super popular in power devices and many other uses and is taking off.
The company will be sold if the technology is shown.
When it comes to Jo Uthus, he deserves negative reactions in both PR/media and from authorities. However, as a shareholder you dont want to reduce the chances of the company being sold by introducing a lot of bad PR about persons. That the complexity unfortunately, and its hard to prove fraud, you have the burden default, but if you manage to convince the court, they will start digging and turn the evidence burden around. However nobody win anything on that. If the tech is great, lets focus on selling it for its worth.
All you an do is recommend people dont buy into his engagements, and you could challenge him non-stop with questions on anything he do on LinkedIn. He is obviously a poser, loving crafting tagging-fueld posts putting him in the spotlight, but shows easy-going-behaviour, but will go great length in obscuring.
I think he probably will be leaving the roles as chairman to build trust and Dobbertin will provide somebody from his network.
I just have one scenario that could explain why no info is given on the tech roadmap, and that is because of secret ongoing negotiations with a potential buyer they are not able to talk about before its done deal. A buyer could demand the board is not making the case interesting for other investors. That is the only reason I can argue, however that is a long shot.
Det virker som vi har fått på plass riktig mann som daglig leder, dog ikke mye å dømme han på enda. Jeg vil ha flere fagfolk som han i styre og ledelse.
Er det ikke feil å ha tidligere CEO som styreleder? I tillegg til å glatte over de feilene som er gjort, vil han potensielt kunne frata ny CEO mulighet til å uttale seg fritt om feiltrinn som er gjort tidligere.
1 Like
Tired of this non straight communication, with smokescreening and obfusicating.
It is hard for the reputation. They really need to publish something, numbers, results, whatever.
On a sidenote with the former R&D and program lead, she wrote about:
> Successfully led the NPI program for AlGaN nanowire-based UVC LEDs, securing research funding and enhancing product development through strategic partnerships.
In the semiconductor industry, NPI stand for New Product Introduction and she says it was successfully, and further she states:
> Led technical projects that contributed to a twofold increase in efficiency of AlGaN semiconductor LEDs.
So there is something about the tech, and its hard to conclude what is the real reason for no information on roadmap.
Jeg tenker det vi ihvertfall kan gjøre hver og en av oss er å sende Dobbertin en mail med sterke anbefalinger om å få på plass en ny styreleder.
Only way Dobbertin can “demand” it, is to threaten to leave the position if chairman is not stepping down. This is something either the investors or the sitting board must demand.
Vel hvis mange sender en mail til både Uthus og Dobbertin så kanskje han(Jo) skjønner det selv.
Mange sånne emails gjør nok noe med lysten til å fortsette. Min mail skal handle om villedende løgnaktig guiding og unnvikelse.
Skal også høre med et par ganske store aksjonærer om de også kan foreta seg noe.
Styre og styreleder velges av aksjonærer, ikke CEO. Styret ansetter CEO, og derfor min kommentarer over. Det blir de største aksjonærene sitt ansvar å eventuelt stille krav om det.
Han har vel lov til å gå av av fri vilje ? Det med guidingen osv, havariet pga det bla(masse i den historien) må være noe for pressen også
1 Like