Member Info for AdeleK

Why is eEnergy, a good company growing well and now profitable, being pushed down? I don’t care personally because I have the capital to buy more shares, but is there a reason? It’s not that Russian Ukraine nonsense is it? Even if I believed this was all organic and not part of some godawful geopolitical strategy, companies like eEnergy benefit from inflated energy prices because it incentivises organisations to save, and their subscription model removes upfront costs. Unless I’m missing the obvious, I have to assume this is risk-off sentiment going to the extreme? Am I missing something here??

I could be wrong of course, but I think this is correct. The capitalised transaction types on the left are my own input on what I believe actually happened rather than how they appear on the surface.

BUY 18-Feb-22 10:43:36 11.975 30,000 Sell* 11.70 12.50 3,593 O
SELL 18-Feb-22 10:27:47 11.70 570 Sell* 11.70 12.50 66.69 O
BUY 18-Feb-22 09:45:22 12.01 20,000 Sell* 11.70 12.50 2,402 O
BUY 18-Feb-22 09:21:17 12.033 33,175 Sell* 11.70 12.50 3,992 O
SELL 18-Feb-22 08:55:50 11.70 10,897 Sell* 11.70 12.50 1,275 O
BUY 18-Feb-22 08:51:34 12.155 25,000 Buy* 11.70 12.50 3,039 O
SELL 18-Feb-22 08:27:58 12.00 20,875 Sell* 12.00 12.50 2,505 O
SELL 18-Feb-22 08:19:34 12.00 135 Sell* 12.00 12.50 16.20 O
BUY 18-Feb-22 08:01:24 12.335 10,897 Buy* 12.00 12.50 1,344 O

Ha. Discombobulated is my favourite word. Discombobulating is my second favourite word. ;D

I won't do it again, I promise... and not selling any more EAAS shares for years if I can help it so round numbers are safe.

And I never thought of such things as clues to buys/sells. I always look at the prices within that timeframe, especially when my own trades are included. It's not entirely reliable but I usually have an idea. I might be wrong about the chunky trades below but I'm pretty sure they're buys. I was buying for 12.044p at 16:11 so it stands to reason the 15:34 trade at 12p was a buy, making it likely the 16:13 trades at 12.4p / 12.5 were buys, too.

16-Feb-22 16:11:48 12.044 3,781 Sell* 455.38 O
16-Feb-22 16:08:41 12.05 8,232 Sell* 991.96 O
16-Feb-22 16:04:20 11.50 15,000 Sell* 1,725 O
16-Feb-22 15:54:42 12.05 49,792 Sell* 6,000 O
16-Feb-22 14:26:28 12.055 2,555 Sell* 308.01 O
16-Feb-22 14:24:53 12.068 24,000 Sell* 2,896 O
16-Feb-22 14:16:47 12.08 7,941 Sell* 959.27 O
16-Feb-22 14:15:02 12.08 50 Sell* 6.04 O
16-Feb-22 13:50:45 12.11 20,000 Sell* 2,422 O
16-Feb-22 13:43:38 12.00 32,223 Sell* 3,867 O
16-Feb-22 13:40:15 12.144 2,029 Sell* 246.40 O
16-Feb-22 13:19:03 12.00 7,497 Sell* 899.64 O
16-Feb-22 13:18:43 12.177 41,061 Sell* 5,000 O
16-Feb-22 13:17:43 12.20 40,983 Sell* 5,000 O
16-Feb-22 13:11:18 12.20 32,000 Sell* 3,904 O
16-Feb-22 13:02:26 12.21 6,142 Sell* 749.94 O

I’m quite sure, based on prices traded, that many of these are buys as the top line is me so that’s definitely a purchase. I have a lot more than that but I like round numbers. It’s an OCD thing…

https://www.turnerpope.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/eEnergyGroupplc__Research_update__16_9_2021__FINAL__BG.01.pdf

I’m just adding these as I find them…
https://www.turnerpope.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/eEnergyGroupplc__Research_update__10_3_2021__FINAL_BG.pdf

Hi guys.

As I scratched my head utterly perplexed by the SP continuing to fall (completely undeserved surely!), I thought I’d look for some research papers.

I found this one from 2020.
https://www.turnerpope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/eEnergyGroupplc__Research_update__6_8_2020__FINAL_BG.pdf

Any others I’ve missed? I’ll continue to look. I’ve watched a number of presentations, rechecked valuations, etc.
Nope. Still don’t understand why this isn’t trading much higher… global macro tensions aside of course, but that applies to most stocks. I feel this is ridiculously unloved for such a fab team.

Again am I missing the bleeding obvious or should this stock be priced much higher? I doubled my position today. Proud to be part of the team in my own way. EEaaS in the right hands. All opinion of course.

I'm not an ODX shareholder but I have invested and do invest in a few AIM stocks, and spotted the recent posts. How you proceed, if you do, is of course nothing to do with me, but as there's a slight overlap here re AIM, I found this Times piece from 2019 that may be of interest.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/junior-market-aim-wrestles-with-a-reputation-for-blow-ups-v0s09qjpd

I agree re fundamentals but I don't blame you re cutting your position, albeit for technical reasons only - I can't fault their fundamentals so that's the only reason to trim heavily imo. I chose to sell most of my shares a month ago. Had to - technical breakdown was unfair and I suspect some macroeconomic / broad risk-off stuff was part of that, rather than eEnergy specific sentiment but markets are cruel sometimes.

I'm glad that they have made a few broker recommendation lists, such as this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWSYmq3EJEs (funnily enough, though I need to do more DD I like SureServe, also recommended in this video). They deserve to be recognised.

However, I was staggered to see them fall below 13p recently so I went back over the numbers then compared to similar-ish companies (in case I had missed a red flag, etc.) and just bought back in. Technically I like EAAS a lot at this price. I would like to see 13.5p as soon as possible (bare minimum where they should be imo!) but that momentum has to shift positive again. I don't think the market is wrong per se, but so behind the curve re the eEnergy story that it's bizarre - unless we really have missed something here. Pricing this stock as a standard industrial, or even speculative renewable, when the growth is fantastic (both organic and intelligent acquisitions), the BoD know what they're doing and the company is in the ESG space, is strange but makes me no less bullish. If being early means buying at a discount, I can deal with that.

P.S. These are both buys because my limit order was filled at 12.65, meaning that the trade above must also be a purchase (same price, slightly higher by 0.01p)
10-Feb-22 08:02:43 12.66 490 Sell* 12.60 13.00 62.03 O
10-Feb-22 08:00:27 12.65 40,000 Sell* 12.60 13.00 5,060 O

Thanks. Sorry, what I meant was why didn't they write that, then add total HODL / owned? Also, I didn't understand the equivalents bit in their case - that I really didn't get.

"As to difficulty this did indeed increase by over 9% mid-January but it is the average difficulty over the whole month that drives production figures and this increased just 6% from December to January"
Thank you, I didn't know this average.

I've just compared to RIOT...

ARB Nov 185 (1831 total)
ARB Dec 214 (2045)
ARB Jan 172 ("company owned 2,748 Bitcoin of which 262 were BTC equivalents")

What does that last bit mean and why doesn't it add up to the previous totals - should be 2217, surely?

However, it's not just them...

RIOT Nov 466 (3387)
RIOT Dec 425 (3812) - they went down when Argo went up.
RIOT Jan 458 ("held approximately 5,347 BTC, all produced by the Company’s self-mining operations.")

Same thing with Riot Blockchain. What does that mean and why didn't RIOT just say 4270?

The good news is, looking at those fluctuations, it's possible Argo over-performed in December. Or, it could be that Riot underperformed in December. This may explain why RIOT went up in Jan whilst ARB went down. Half full / half empty = same outcome (if I'm right).

RE network difficulty, I'm guessing the RNS was referring to this?
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/bitcoin-mining-difficulty-sets-time-032656607.html

@HGN "Then you have the moral questions and the reason BTC was started in the first place."

That's the one thing that really bothers me, too, but I think this is why a compromise will end up being the outcome. Bitcoin as digital gold - yes. As an alternative currency for limited use - probably. As a direct competitor to CBDC's? Hmmm, that would be one heck of a victory. Possible I guess, and maybe with enough countries on side we will find sanctuaries for financial freedom, but this will be very, very tough.

Yahoo Finance: "Warren’s targeting of cryptocurrency miners is the latest example of lawmakers ratcheting up pressure on the cryptocurrency sector. Many industry players, investors and analysts fear that it is only a matter of time before miners, exchanges and the digital coins themselves are slapped with regulations. This is all bad news, and comes at a difficult time for cryptocurrencies."

The last line is about as wrong as wrong could be and the overall tone / angle is strange.

1. Regulation is *very* helpful for cryptocurrencies, except for the poop coins held (and issued) by dodgy scammers, and who cares about them? They're the second worst bandits out there. If you want to know the worst bandits btw, look up CBDCs. ;)

By de-risking, institutions that are currently hesitant to buy in (despite client interest rising significantly in recent years - probably FOMO by accredited investors since they're going via institutions) will be able to justify investing, and they clearly want to do so. Also, did you know that BlackRock has a percentage of MARA and RIOT? (source: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2021/08/20/blackrock-has-almost-400m-invested-in-bitcoin-mining-stocks-report/)

What does this tell us? It tells us there's a risk today, but a resolvable one. I think Larry Fink is smart enough to know when to jump in and when to avoid, especially with BlackRock's support when the US govt needs them. (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-21/how-larry-fink-s-blackrock-is-helping-the-fed-with-bond-buying), meaning that when this is resolved, previously hesitant ii's will buy hard and and prices will likely go much higher from here. After all, BlackRock doesn't hold other people's bags. Regulations are important, especially for projects backed by VC's.

2. Re environmental impact, this is the usual angle taken by central planning types. Bitcoin is, potentially, a direct threat to their CBDC's. This is their way of saying "stay in your lane." Bitcoin's alleged environmental impact allows them to argue for restricted use case: asset only.

Saying that, if you follow the likes of the WEF and read reports by McKinsey et al you will know that ESG is a central corporate theme these days so compliance must be proven. As for Sen. Warren, I think she is genuinely anti cryptocurrencies, but the corporate world is not. Biden doesn't want Bitcoin to go away, he just wants it to be whatever his corporate backers tell him he wants it to be, and that is 'mostly harmless'.

The pressure on Bitcoin miners, despite their use of renewables, ESG consciousness, etc. is based on ii's being compliant to sell their products as "ESG worthy". Again, another positive for the crypto space.

Conclusion: This piece by Yahoo Finance presents as something negative, but it is likely quite positive. And since Yahoo Finance is writing about it publicly for free I'm guessing all this negativity has been priced in already.

What?

https://fortune.com/2022/02/01/russia-local-crypto-214-billion-regulation/

"While Russia’s security services were said to be pushing the central bank for a total ban of cryptocurrencies on the grounds that they could be used to fund opposition parties, they have since switched to supporting the regulatory approach proposed by the government..." (a "regulatory compromise" -is backed by Putin, so that means it will be a regulatory compromise).

Do you work for a central bank IK? Or maybe you're from the BIS. ;)

Yep, it finally caught up. MARA and RIOT up post-market 2-3%, i assume because of BTC climbing above $37k but could also be because Apple blew away expectations so all growth is getting a little boost.

Thank you for your kind words and very interesting link. I’ve always admired Bill Ackman’s IQ - a quite brilliant brain, and kind of underrated imo. It amuses me that there’s another Carl Icahn link, though. Sometimes I think they will troll each other until the end of time.

“I’ll stick my neck out and suggest we won’t see $40k for a while. $38-39 now confirmed resistance and the FED meeting results has made me think BTC will actually drop harder and quicker than originally thought.”

No denial of resistance for now but if you focus on what Powell was really saying it was that the Fed would have more meetings to discuss rates and tapering, after which they will have more meetings… the Q&A was hilarious. It was less Powell Pivot and more Powell “all things to all men”. This is classic Powell, but the 2022 version. He played it very well to be fair.

The market is somewhat confused but tech earnings are seem to be outperforming value so far - and most on both sides are beating expectations - importantly, earnings + guidance are better than feared. The worst case scenario is now looking overcooked (as I and some others predicted it would be - all priced in, and some, hence why we oversold growth).

That’s why RIOT and MARA are up pre-market, my fave tech stocks are climbing before the open, US tech ETFs are being bought by ii’s this morning and the NASDAQ is higher pre-market than the DJIA and S&P, but all just about green.

Unless things decline before the bell, I think the ii’s are going to start buying more tech stocks, which will increase if earnings and guidance continue to (mostly) impress, and this is all good for BTC = good for Argo Blockchain. That isn’t to say the headwinds have gone away otherwise we’d see BTC above $40k already and NASDAQ futures above 15000, but I get the impression ii’s are less bearish than a few days and weeks ago. Unless Apple seriously disappoints tonight things are looking up already… early days, though, and certainly no time for bulls to open the bubbly.

Why is it some of us get into trouble for try to predict Bitcoin price support and resistance levels but other people can say "This share is going to..." in either direction, but especially lower, and be called "sensible"? After all, Bitcoin miners and Bitcoin are pretty correlated. I'm not knocking anyone for doing this, but standards should be consistent, regardless of bullish or bearish sentiment, where it comes to price estimates/predictions.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/bitcoin-surges-3000-lows-rate-hike-odds-tumble

Note: NASDAQ bounced off 13,700 - bounced a little above my trend line that goes back to 2018. If NASDAQ closes below 14,000 I lean towards Chaebol’s relief rally view, even though the comment was about BTC (they somewhat follow each other as risk on tech growth trades, hence my reference to tech stocks).

If 14,000 holds I think this is the market telling us something that could be positive for Bitcoin and the miners including our Argo B… maybe rate hikes priced in too much now? Typical market overbuying-overselling-overbuying-overselling? We’ll see.

No way I’d rule out the relief rally view at this stage, though. I still think this was a flush and de-frothing correction (crash for many) rather than broad capitulation a la March 2020, but I wouldn’t bet on that holding true either. Last hour and next few days - institutions, Fed, earnings, etc. - are key. We’ll see.

I’m not ruling that out Chaebol. However, this isn’t just about Bitcoin and Argo. When I was following airline stocks in 2020 for technical support levels I didn’t feel that they were being impacted like this. Perhaps it’s because I’m a little late to the crypto space. Maybe it just behaves too differently - it would explain my inaccuracy compared to my other stock picks. I was trading in and out of VAXX last week like a seasoned pro. Perhaps I should just accept defeat. But I have a constant doubt about all this activity and my intuition is unusually accurate. Either it’s just too far outside my comfort zone and I’m plain wrong, or I’m right, but I’m early (hopefully not 4 years early). I’m hoping that’s it, and I just didn’t calculate how the first previous act of the play would go. Is that hopium? Yep. Is it just that? No, it’s my intuition, which I’ve learned to trust above most things, even when everyone is telling me I’m wrong.

However, if I really am wrong (next few months will do) I really won’t be able to post here at all with even a basic hello due to the level of shame! :D