Member Info for allforprofit

Where are these test results? In the time this 'testing' has been supposed to be going on the kit has probably become obsolete!

My guess is that the results can be summarised as follows:-

1. It does not work with any mining kit in use today

2. That does not prove that it cannot be made to work.

3. It is 'proving more difficult and taking longer than expected*

4. Everyone remains 'very interested' in what QBT is doing*.

* These two points are QBT boilerplate. They appear in every QBT progress report.

Is seaman Staines a member of the crew of the good ship QBT?

Relax, lads and ladesses. QBT is still meandering on, burning cash, as it has done for the last quarter of a century. No doubt it will continue to do so for a while longer yet, the SP falling with the capital destruction, until it eventually disappears up its own fundament. Or more correctly, until the last of the cash has disappeared into Gardin's back pocket.

QBT has been, and continues toi be, a very nice little earner for him. Just as well he is not paid by results, of course.I doubt that is an accident. Gardin is a smart fellow when it comes to feathering his own nest. Would anyone care to do the calculation and tell us how much he has received over the years, and compare that figure with the profits (losses actually) incurred by QBT, and the current net value of its assets? And then tot up the sums rased in capital raises, and the calculate the % dilution.Perhaps better not. The answer smay spoil the QBT bulls bank holiday weekend. Not even the most inveterate 'troll' would want to do that.

User S, a succinct summary of the the patent hearing: QBT argued its case and was given the middle finger, but as yet shows no sign that it has understood that response.

Does anyone know off hand when the options were granted and whether their exercise date has subsequently been extended?

If the exercise date is to be extended now, QBT is leaving that pretty late.

The only investment information their grant and imminent expiry (unexercised) provides to current and prospective shareholders is:-

1. When they were granted, it can be assumed that the grantees believe them to have value, ie that the QBT SP was likely to be higher than their exercise price on the last day on which they could be exercised

2. That expectation has not been fulfilled (or more precisely, the prospect of that expectation being fulfilled is vanishingly small)

3. The SP is currently (only a few days before the expiry date) about 95% below the exercise price.

4. Points 1-3 demonstrate the extent to which QBT's performance during the period between grant and final date for exercise has fallen short of expectations at the date of the grant of the options, and point 3 demonstrates how low current market expectation for QBT's future performance (or even survival as a listed company) now is.

Thought of the day for current and prospective QBT shareholders. Remember the age old wisdom about trying ti buck the market: If you buck the market the market generally ****s you.

KK, I thought I was the biggest pessimist on the board.? As soon as I go a few days without posting you give my crown to someone else!

E300 in 20 minutes, E15 per minute? You should have stuck wth the trusy semi diesel.

Perhaps though the fuel consumption would have been modest if you had been planing rather than plaining. Worth a try.

It would be a sensible precaution to stick with the khaki shorts until your 'feeling that things are going to get moving' wears off, OSD. As I have previously pointed out, the problem with a gut reaction is that it is all too often followed by a seat of the pants feeling.

Designed for the support and comfort of CEOs.

OSD, fools rush in [or on] where angels fear to tread.

A4P examined the box, and warned that it did not appear to have been designed to bear the weight of shareholders.

Llywelyn, I don't know much about quantum computing, but I sure as hell do about company reorganisation.

And I don't ever recall a case where an exercise such as i outlined was flagged up to the PIs in advance mrh. You may also care to note that scheme i outlined does not in fact depend upon any de-listing. De-listig helps as a first step if you are going to sail close to the wind legally, as you only have shareholders and not the listing authority scrutinising what you are doing, but nothing I outlined is going to attract unwelcome interest from the AIM authorities.

I am not predicting any of this, but it is an option open to Garmin, and the plan to list BlocKeeper rather than use it as a special purpose wholly owned subsidiary is at least consistent with such an exercise.

PS wili, if the thing is done properly, the loan to BlocKeeper should of course be unsecured (or escured on assets of small value) and for a long repayment term. It will be an asset in the QBT liquidation, so the long term and no, or low and deferred, interest ensures that its sale value in the liquidation will be heavily discounted. For neatness, BlocKeeper can then buy the loan from the liquidator, for next to nothing. There will not be any competition to buy it, as BlocKeeper won't be exactly a triple A covenant, and it will not be worth even its value discounted for time if it is unsecured and BlocKeeper (the borrower) does not look a safe bet to repay.

Willi, it is yet another mystery. If BlocKeeper was intended to be wholly owned subsidiary of QBT, the QBT shareholders would enjoy all the fruits of any success it has. But if it is intended ti be a wholly owned subsidiary (ie all the shares held by QBT), no question of listing could arise.

Since Gardin says the listing process is underway, it does not look to me as though he intends to waste the fruits of any success it may achieve on the QBT shareholders., though QBT's capital (up o £100K so Gardin says) is to be used to get it up and running. Probably a free loan! Moreover, even if it contracts with QBT for the use of /rights to QBT's tech, the price paid for it will not necessarily be market rate. The lower the price paid for it to QBT, the greater the profits will be for the BlocKeeper shareholders.

Or BlocKeeper could simply buy outright all the R&D intellectual assets from QBT. If Gardin signals his intention to terminate the consultancy under which he manages QBT first,l(eaving QBT without its key man) the price should be negligible. The gross prospective proceeds of the Sipiem litigation (ie without taking on any liabiliy for litigation costs incurred) could also be bought by BlocKeeper for a song (ie very heavily discounted to reflect uncertainty and potential future litigation costs). Once all the assets have been transferred into BlocKeper, QBT can be put into insolvent liquidation, or the shell sold for the value of its tax losses, if their value exceeds the liabilities . It is not particularly complicated or difficult if the same person (Gardin) is the key man (or in the case of QBT, ex-key man) in both companies, and without him there will be no third party market interest in the assets.

The icing on the cake is that if the original company is insolvent at the end of the process the liquidator will have no funds to investigate any of the transactions, or to seek restitution even if they were sold at an undervalue, unless the shareholders subscribe to provide him with a fighting funds.Which of course only ver happens if rthere is an institutional shareholder with a large shareholding and deep pockets. Which in the case of QBT there is not. There is a bondholder with a large interest (62%), but it looks as though Gardin s going to take the bondholders (or at least the big one) along with him, so no potential fly in the ointment there.

Thanks, Phimx. I think my point still stands though.In instalation, configuration, or what you will is till required, so it is not simply hashtime which is being bought (sub-contracted for).

But thenI have to confess that it is al a bit above my head. I had a very sheltered upbringing. My Mummy taught me to steer clear of nonces, let alone extranonces. Perhaps if Gardin wants to keep his distance from them too, his Mummy taught him the same thing.

Hexam, if that was a response to my post, it reinforces my belief that the interviewrer failed to ask the important question, the answer to which would have resolved the mystery.

We should remember of course that QBT paid for this interview. Probably QBT provided a script of questions to be asked. Gardin is keen to go on another jolly to Las Vegas. He cannot afford to give an answer to any question which would result in his visa being cancelled. It is easy to over-analyse. Often the obvious answer is the right one.

'Rent hash time'. Maybe i am just stoopid, but doesn't that mean 'rent hash time on a rig'? If so, the tech can't produce any efficiency saving unless it is installed on that rig. How long, and at what cost, does installation (and removal) take? I can't see ow this stacks up save in the event of a fairly long term rental and operation of specific RIGS, which is not the same as rental of hash time.

If the tech worked (which it has to do if the new business is to be profitable), I could see the sense in hiring and operating rigs using the tech, not as a separate business, but as a means of demonstrating the value of the tech to potential customers who, if they saw that it worked, would signup to use it themselves. But that is not what Gardin is talking about doing either.

It rather looks to me as though the interviewer missed the most important question to ask Gardin, the answer to which would have enabled us to evaluate everything else he said; 'What exactly have you been smoking?'

UserS, think you are right. I said before the raise that I suspected that the testing would not lead to contracts, but it would nevertheless be declared a 'success', that it had provided valuable information etc etc, that R&D would continue, QBT more optimistic than ever etc etc. This recent announcement seems to be in line with that - a pivot away from contracts with miners /rig makers (which will no doubt be retained as an 'objective', or a 'medium term objective' - to bitcoin mining itself which of course Gardin is now saying is 'something we were always interested in doing'.

It is the same tactic as we saw with the patents: initially a key protection required, nothing can be marketed or even demonstrated until we have them, then 'not essential, we are looking into other contractual protection approaches but the patents ould still be nice to have, so we are carrying on with the applications'.

And so it goes on. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow almost in our grasp, more R&D, more irons in the fire, jam tomorrow.

You either continue to go with the ever regenerating narrative your faith undimmed, or you conclude that Gardin is breaking the first rule of holes: when you are in one stop digging, and leave him to carry on digging, but not with your money. He is being paid a third odf a million a year to keep digging. The shareholders just see the price of heir shares fall..

OSD, remarkably little gloating today. As a matter of fact, with something concrete to post about, the commentary today has been far more focussed than for a long time.

Mind you if you are happy to be here, either

(a) you sold out yesterday, or

(b) you are an eternal optimist!

I Had forgotten that Senhor Rios had been appointed as strategic adviser. His main claim to fame is that Intel closed down the department he worked in, and gave him his P45 rather than redeploy him. No gold watch, no golden goodbye, not even a consultancy with Intel . Intel's fortunes have looked up markedly since then.

Initially QBT appointed him as a consultant, and subsequently he was appointed a director. He is paid by QBT in share options. Advice is seldom worth more than you pay for it, and often less.

When assessing the commercial reality of the new scheme for the near bankrupt QBT to apply 'up to' £100k through a subsidiary in a new venture to provide liquidity to bitcoin miners having a thin time, think back on the 'medium term strategy' announced a couple of years ago for QBT to design and manufacture specialist chips. There was no budget or technical plan announced, but one must not carp about trifles like that - 'it does not matter that we have no design team, we can ask chatpoint, and someone must have an empty garage somewhere, so it does not matter that we have no foundry. Tooling? Between us we must have a set of spanners and a screwdriver or two. Skilled workers? Nothing a couple of Milan university students working part time can't handle'

That was announced as a 'medium term' strategy, and there has never been any announcement that it has been abandoned, so presumably it is quite well advanced by now, and fully budgeted for as today's announcement did not say that any of the £500K (less expenses) raised would be applied to it.

Reassuring too to see that all the directors have shown confidence by subscribing in the capital raise, as they did in the January 2025 capital raise (at 1.15p). Reassuring too to see the identities of the others with whom the shares were placed identified, and to see that they are heavy hitters in the sector ....

What is it that leaves me with a faint suspicion that, not for the first time, Gardin is extracting the Michael?