REMINDER: Our user survey closes on Friday, please submit your responses here.
I would also say for the savings they're making, that 20% cut in annual operating costs they outlined is extremely high. I would actually defy anyone to find any other plc making cuts greater than this within a single financial year, so a bit ludicrous that poster complaining on this front.
Saying BCH has the same genesis block as bitcoin is misleading mate, when it was created out of thin air in 2017 by forking bitcoin they were simply cloning the existing blockchain history up to that point, including first block, before tweaking the code and giving it a new name.
Some more good news on the Craig Wright front
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/legal/judge-imposes-worldwide-asset-freeze-on-fake-satoshi-craig-wright
I think a tipping point may be reached when IBIT has more than GBTC, can't be all that far away now, currently 254k vs 333k.
@CB Clsk certainly were heavy on the acquisition talk. Not sure what they have to gain by being so blatant, maybe seeking forgiveness for the ATM. For all the talk of M&A across miners the surprising thing to me is how little consolidation there's been. Post-halving activity bound to pick up you'd think.
As of 31st March they report a cash balance of £23.4 million. In January they guided FY24 revenue to be £80-95 million, today's RNS maintains that. They have also previously given target of 20% reduction in annual operating costs - you should assume job losses are a part of that. Based on all this they have more than enough cash on hand to see through this year, before their target of break even FY25.
Where it gets a bit messy and typical lack of forward planning is the loan term was 36 months, so if the hosting agreement did terminate, they'd still have another 12 months of payments, but at that point without the revenue to cover them.
The machines were put down as collateral as part of that loan. Seems checkmate to Galaxy whichever way you look at it, I think they keep this site for themselves and use it to hype up their own share price, they're already on that path.
That's funny, to the average Galaxy follower that must seem totally cryptic but all too real from the perspective of PW era Argo.
Galaxy seem to be making an awful lot of noise about Texas lately. Reading the smoke signals it can't bode well for Argo's renewal chances. Novogratz has to be all to aware of the miner premium and benefits of claiming a bigger piece for themselves.
Galaxy are claiming to have expanded Helios, so would have their own rigs in the expanded parts. In below link 'Proprietary' refers to themselves (rated at 1.9 EH), then 'Hosted' is Argo at 2.2EH.
https://investor.galaxy.com/news/news-details/2024/Galaxy-Announces-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2023-Financial-Results/default.aspx
I keep coming back to Tenner saying: "Some shareholders actually didn't want us to return anything."
I find this comment amazing. If any shareholder did say that, it would have been highly unrepresentative, so why go public with it? Why is it that any time he's not given a script he manages to make some new verbal clanger?
He's lucky he didn't get a grilling on this, shows it's a paid for article via the flashy PR, not just because a minnow like this with barely any revenue isn't newsworthy, but the softball questions. On this point alone should have been asked about the payment being lower than promised.
After all as recently as January the company said was making a "commitment to return between £33.0m and £40.0m to shareholders."
Two months later we learn it's actually going to be "up to £33.0 million to shareholders".
Now the message is we should be grateful to be getting anything at all.
Valueseeker you didn't like it when I pointed out the cashflow issues even before the raise, and tried to give me a pretty smart reply to that. You've also been making unsubstantiated claims like how this will have exponential revenue growth, and shooting down other posters who pointed out some of the glaring issues here.
Rather than now trying to present like an expert now, you should be accepting a bit of humble pie and admitting you were wrong. I hope nobody was fooled by your ramping.
@troublesome Kooba gave the name of the PR firm, look them up. Their client list reads like a who's who of some of the most well known and largest plcs. Includes multi-billion market caps like BP. Seems very flashy to me, especially in context of a micro cap like this.
For all the flashy PR it's very hard for them to gloss over how hapless Tenner is. Can only go so far when you're lumbered with him as the face of your firm.
It's a tad concerning new red flags seem to appear whenever he makes his latest pronouncement. Now claiming some shareholders didn't want any return - after the company has been dangling the carrot for over a year - stretches credibility.
Then he says: "Given we'd already made the commitment, we felt we couldn't go as far as that."
Gee thanks Brian. Clearly everyone should be grateful for this damp squib tender, and thankful they're returning to shareholders anything at all - let alone millions below guidance company itself gave.
I need to thank you for pointing out the insider selling, would have missed that. Looks terrible now seeing they were knowingly doing it ahead of this. Then trying to bury bad news dropping it after market close before Easter. Poor all round. Big relief though, might have to buy some Mara immersion fluid to celebrate.
Yes inability to sell shares while it's private is the big issue. Sometimes when delists happen the company at least allows share sales via a third party platform, but here they specifically say that "a trading facility will not be offered".
Owning shares in a private company is a very different kettle of fish from a public company, with none of the usual protections and benefits you get from owning shares in a plc that has to follow regulations and disclosure requirements.
You would be entering a wild west where, while you will still technically own those shares, you won't have any real visibility into what the company is up to. While it delists they'll be diluting rump shareholders substantially for good measure.
Hive looks good on paper and hold a wee bit too, but yes main challenge is market totally indifferent to it. Could be as they've not really kept the expansion pace and most machines will be getting on a bit. Iceland unfortunately will become more problematic too https://archive.is/f2phT
Taken the opportunity to join Clsk exodus with last holdings, insider sells and interview highlighted here raising some red flags. Don't totally hate it, tbh was v good to me and if falls far enough could be a good rebuy opportunity. For now though it looks like we're entering a Mara phase 🤞
Short report not all that convincing to me, not very damning. Weirdly you'd think Mstr holders would have already been aware of its whopping premium to underlying holdings, apparently all not to judge by the drop, crazy space we're in.
Could be hype's got them yeah. To go from being nobodies to running a £4bn company must be a bit like being a lottery winner, people go weird.
They were strangely direct and tad aggressive about it. Makes me question Clsk more than Mara, these kinds of digs don't normally come from a position of strength. Indicates a bit of insecurity if anything, the more you're winning the less mind you should be paying to your competitors. Even if everything they were saying was true, there are enough analysts to work it all out without going public with their own critique.