Member Info for BigBiteNow

Ok, appreciated Stalin123.

In return, I will try not to cook too hot and will avoid unnecessary forecasting.

2/2

I appreciate that some here will still wish to call me out on my revenue forecasts for Q2. Those forecasts were my best guess and were heavily caveated. Anyone who takes the time to read my full posting history from that time will see that. That said, I still think they could have hit the bottom end of that range if they'd continued on their same path. However, what we now know is that they wouldn't have been profitable revenues. The introduction of Mike Ashley has changed the focus of the company. Now it is about sales that make money, over revenue chasing. I can live with that so long as the growth in revenues starts to follow through once this reset and THG is bedded in.

What I like is the fact that Mike Ashley is now driving the direction of the 3 businesses. It was a wise move to hire him. My understanding is that he was tasked with setting each business on the right track, starting with DD. He has widened the range and brought more household items into the offering to help customers build a larger, more regular basket. Reading between the lines, I also think his contact list/connections are starting to bear fruit.

This has led to some early success on the absolute margin, which Martin has made clear is absolutely critical. They need to show the market that it wasn't a one-off. For me, they also need to deliver a very solid Q4 and allow the market to dream once more about the possible. Stating that they would at least match Q3 shouldn't have been necessary because that should be the least investors can expect. Elevated Christmas AOV alone should get them there. Across the 3 brands, they also now have c. 365,000 customers on their database, and they know what they like to buy. That wasn't there last year and they still managed £4.3m.

If they can get the right stock in the right quantities (Black Friday plan mentioned) and can transition to THG smoothly, then they could have a very good Q4.

I am happy with the progress on profitability. HUD have delivered what they said they would in 2025. They will fall short of where I wanted them to be by Q4 end, and they have definitely had challenges and made some mistakes. But they are now on the right track, the foundations feel much stronger, and from what I have seen (Martin in particular), they are working their socks off to deliver the story I bought in for last year.

1/2

Hi Bobby,

I would encourage you to reach out to Martin and ask him to explain the business more. The biggest issue I see with Huddled is their ability to educate the market about their business. This is in part affected by the fact that deals with eye-catching high street names cannot be discussed openly because these brands don't want anyone knowing that they are giving stock away so cheaply. Think of well-known wellness brands and vitamins, both of which were mentioned in yesterday's presentation. The other issue is explaining the costs associated with reaching operational profitability.

For instance, yesterday we were told that the combined 3 brands were operationally profitable in Sept. I believe many more casual observers didn't even bother to investigate what this actually means. To do that, one must read note 3 of the interims and listen carefully to what the FD said (4mins 17s).

1. Gross profit for a brand means all warehouse and marketing costs have been covered.

2. By reaching operational profitability, they have delivered positive EBITDA, which means all the admin costs associated with the 3 brands are now covered.

3. Admin costs have risen, but if you compare the same note to the H1 2024 note 3, you will see that the uplift this year (£228,000 vs H124) is all at the individual brands, whilst the head office overhead actually dropped by £67,000 to £541,000. However, we were told that this overhead will slightly rise in H2 2025, mainly due to Mike taking up the CEO role. So I am currently using £600,000 until it is made more concrete.

What that all says is that in September, Huddled achieved its first bite into the remaining c. £100,000 of costs they need to cover before positive group cash flow is achieved and that they did it despite taking on board increased admin overheads at the subsidiary level.

That is where we currently are, but of course, it requires the business to at least keep generating the same absolute margins.

The only other item I believe sits outside this calculation is refunds. My understanding is that these ran at c. 2% of revenues in March (indicated in a CEO video at the time). They may have gone up or down, I don't know. Huddled has since moved back to Royal Mail and will continue with them when under the THG umbrella.

THG claim 99.9% correct deliveries. If they get close to that, then refunds should be minimised to normal error levels whatever that turns out to be. Huddled aren't talking about this likely because the DPD service move was problematic and THG have yet to prove just how good they can be.

What do you consider to be reduced flow rates Ezhik?

The results of the additional zones at Inez will be interesting to see. If they can get the flow rate at least up to their self-imposed 2,000 Mcf/d (currently 1,157 Mcf/d), then the average sustained flow rate across the 4 wells would be 2,725 Mcf/d vs 2,000 Mcf/d. Even when reducing this to 80% flow, it would still be above the guided rate, which we are told delivers $4m a well pre-tax cash flow at $500Mcf. Be it the $500Mcf still needs to be proven.

What Inez also does is begin to introduce the southern dome 2C resources into the 2P category, and also, one would hope, increase the overall established resources at Rudyard. Post updated resource statement, of course.

Post the initial production coming online (which I also feel will be next month), we should see well No.5 spud. The last one for this year, which was listed as

a driver of the June fundraiser. Success there takes us to 5 wells. Listening to the Crux interview again yesterday, I was reminded of Bo's criticism of other helium plays that take months to organise testing and his belief that rigs should be turned around quickly to get the most out of each buck. So I see that testing coming asap and that 5th drill starting as soon as production is stabilised. After all, they spud Darwin #1 on 30th Oct last year.

Once all of that is resolved, we should then find out what the plan is for next year. I would think a minimum of 4-5 more wells would be the desire, with some creative M&A factored in. Again, listen to his messaging in the Crux interview. The market will sway positive and negative as each milestone and gap between plays out, but there is more than enough opportunity for a forward-thinking market to push the SP on when it is ready to do so.

I must admit that I assumed that the second picture was the access road being constructed, but now I see the pipework being pulled which I assume is from one of the well sites.

As someone else said, they don't mess about in Montana. This is getting very exciting. But I still think the strategy and the timelines could be better explained to prevent such assumptions from having to be made. That comment does not detract from what is a very driven team we have leading this business.

Thank you for that quote reminder, Kaeren.

HEX remains my largest holding for the exact reason that the risks are contained over the longer term.

Bo has built a solid reputation for getting things done and has developed a good trust with investors. But it is appropriate to begin turning that progress into a clearly communicated, concrete strategy and plan, given how close production should now be. Going into production means different responsibilities, and one can have full faith in management, but still call that out.

It is rare to be so close to production and not know what it looks like or how it will develop. Be it I respect the fact that they are throwing a lot of energy at new drills, etc.

Guidance concerns aside, the only thing that truly matters to me right now is them beating the Winter. I am no expert on what can be installed and tested in colder months, but I do respect the severity of the Montana winter. Perhaps those with greater knowledge on this can comment.

I assume they will heat the plant shed, so there I'm not too concerned, but I am guessing. So I would appreciate clarity from the company on what needs to be completed and what potential effects this can have on installations if any. This brings me to my second point.

I have a lot of faith in Bo and his team, but I do feel it is now time to start demonstrating the stages required to complete this install and the corporate plan moving forward. I am not concerned about Inez testing because the guidance was always 4 wells in the first 6 months of production. So I expect 1-2 wells online at the beginning. If it is more then great. But the importance of this is cash generation, which eliminates any lingering thoughts around cash and enables funds to be built up to complete the other wells and drive Rudyard to the next stage of exploration/development.

So first up, beat winter if indeed that is what needs to happen. Then show investors what the strategy is moving forward, so we can all buy into it and unleash the excitement that this share is certainly capable of.

There are 342m shares in issue, which would give Jangada c. 13.68m.

I doubt the presentation represented their latest holding because someone has been very actively selling these last few days.

There is plenty of news flow and signposted milestones to drive them out, so it isn't really a big issue.

A healthy backtest of the breakout would be ideal here.

Below is the tweet I put out after watching the presentation video.

START OF TWEET

The smart contract element is mind-blowing—instant assessment of milestones and payment against them. Imagine how much energy, efficiency and time savings that can bring to mining development programmes.

Bigger projects to be assessed, helping scale the #POW model.

Did you note he used the UCAM uranium JV as an example (15mins in) of not being able to report what they think they have before they have the assay results?

Projects to be more live with more real-time reporting. This is super exciting.

Stated opportunities to get current POW projects funded through the Minestarter platform. So bang in line with my last tweet on the matter.

They say it will generate a lot of news. Platform build out and marketing, etc.

"Going to be talking very soon, I hope, about the projects that are going to come on board that are going to back the token itself."

What makes this all the more exciting is the fact that POW is cashed up to deliver this and a good number of projects along with it.

"We are using that tokenised decentralised environment to access a much, much bigger pool of capital and much, much bigger and better projects."

Minestarters is all about bridging the gap between a capital-starved early-stage mining sector

"On the one hand, we've got this capital scarcity to fund projects that actually at the start of the value chain return the most, and we've got these capital markets that are kind of booming in another segment (tokenisation), and Minestarters is all about bridging that gap."

"The beautiful thing is...we have this already huge pipeline and a funnel of projects that we are going through our technical audit on."

"We are looking to launch imminently once we put all these strands together. It's an exciting time."

"Transformative not just fr Power Metasl but for the juniors in overall terms."

I really like this move.

END

Reading the above quotes, the platform will be up and running shortly (the timer on the Minestarter website is perhaps a giveaway), and the initial project(s) will also be announced soon. If the messaging is on point, then in this current resources bull run we are witnessing, this platform could be received very well indeed, especially in the US.

Afternoon everyone,

A simple AI search on token blockchain platforms explains the various ways that the owners can monetise it.

Here are just two of many.

Firstly, they are holding onto 25% of the tokens (30m) in treasury, of which POW will technically own 49%. These can be sold at any time to generate capital or simply for revenue for the company. They can also generate fees from project owners who onboard their projects and use the infrastructure plus they can charge transaction fees when tokens are bought or sold.

I would not rule out POW also investing directly in tokens. Some may not like this but it is arguably the best way to use some of the funds they hold.

Would I want them to buy a project where they have to fund all work and all risk is in one project or should they take a stake in a platform with multiple projects keep being added that spread that risk and where the costs to develop those projects is shared amongst a great many more entities? POW cannot take projects very far without listing and seeing their share diminish. This platform has the capacity to take on projects that can be seen right through to production.

The token wins everytime.

As the platform grows it will take on its own value as an asset and POW will own 49% of that. Even mediocre success (and they have a huge pipeline of projects currently being reviewed) should see multiples of their orginal investment with the blue sky possibility of it being far larger in time.

It is fabulous risk reward and worth taking some time to understand.

Interpreted, not interrupted.

The directors are sitting on c. 25m in share options priced between 5-6p.

The last two raises also saw directors take part to the tune of 14.6m shares and so received warrants at 4.5p (1.66m) and 6p (13m).

They also have 10.7m shares as a reward option at 0.5p following the successful $5m grant funding from the DFC.

So they really don't need to be buying shares in the market because they will be saving their pennies for some or all of that.

There are c. 33m warrants at 4.5p but they mean nothing until the share is well above that level, and when they are converted, they are certain in their value and can add substantial funds as the company prepares to close stage 1 finance. Yes, it can be interrupted as pumping, but I'd rather see an active management team looking to convert existing warrants than a lazy one happy to take more finance at lower levels and still have the same 4.5p warrants in play.

That said, perhaps they are merely keen to share what is shaping up to be a very interesting graphite story.

Yes, Stalin12,3 I am a serial ramper who wastes my time writing extensive posts on a BB with just 4-5 people contributing towards it (two of which are clearly negative towards the company) in the hope they will buy a lot of shares so I can make gigantic profits at their expense. Woohahahaha!

Deep down, I knew it would be a mistake getting involved with these BBs again. The vast majority of 'contributors' only pick fault and offer no tangible reasoning or research whatsoever. You can have it all to yourselves again now.

Premier Miton taking a stake is an excellent endorsement for Huddled and a necessary milestone to take Huddled up through the valuation chain. Such institutions don't tend to buy initial stakes on the open market. They want to be invited in.

I am surprised there hasn't been more positivity towards this development.

From the Linda #1 drill completion RNS.

"The drilling operation was completed in 18 days, encountering several hard chert horizons within the Madison, which slowed progress. With the well already open for nearly three weeks and high quality helium shows in the primary target horizon, and oil shows within the Nisku and Duperow formations, the Company decided to not drill test the Flathead formation in this well. "

Linda #1 was also delayed, but because they didn't put a timescale on it, nobody really noticed. Not guaranteeing anything just sharing facts.

The Linda #1 drill took 18 days but was reported as complete 20 days after the commencement RNS. So, as things stand, we are still within that timeframe, even before we consider the possibility of them drilling deeper.

Sometimes I think I don't explain myself properly or indeed answer the points raised.

"There is a great deal of incentive to be moved and build confidence in the new fulfilment before Q4 begins because it could be a step change period."

By this, I mean not only to complete the move quicker (for Q4) but also to begin testing the new fulfilment by having stock sent out from this facility to test Huddled's remaining in-house functions.

I/we could be completely wrong, and the new fulfilment could be switched on at a point in time. But I am all about logic, and it tells me that this doesn't make business sense because of the reasons I have just given. That said, THG Ingenuity is not a small operation, and Huddled, as things stand today, has just c. 750 SKUs and a good few of them won't be moving over and/or will be replaced with stock already at THG. Compare this to the 8,500 Holland and Barrett SKUs transferred in May 2024. So when it happens, it's not going to be a big deal for THG. So this brings my focus back to Huddled's side of things and what their main goals/pressures will be. Depth of stock in time for Q4 and building their own team's strengths and confidence to manage a new warehouse and potentially a large uplift in orders (think customer services).

At the end of the day, the guidance is "completed by the end of Sept", but we should all be open to the idea that this strategic move did not begin with the RNS announcement. That it will unfold during Q3 as opposed to being some deadline that we should fear could be missed. It is in management's interest to get this move done asap (staff leaving, twin deliveries, disruption). August should be the quietest month (holiday season), so it is naturally the most sensible time to complete this move. So I would say by the end of Q3 is a longstop, and I wouldn't be surprised to be hearing that it is completed before Sept (return to school) begins. There is a great deal of incentive to be moved and build confidence in the new fulfilment before Q4 begins because it could be a step change period. I also wouldn't be surprised to see inventory being built up in preparation for it. After all, Huddled has a significantly larger customer base compared to Q4 2024, but its database will be even bigger (think about those 30,000 visitors to the websites post TV adverts, a fraction of which will have purchased). This gives them a substantial target audience in the lead up to Christmas (arguably through lower cost advertising (Think Google pop-up ads etc) and now they won't have warehouse constraints. But what they need to do is have all 3 businesses in flow (this includes the right levels of stock) and the confidence that they can deliver without the brand being tarnished (refunds, etc).

If you think about it, this move had to happen this Summer or it likely would have been next summer before it could occur again. What if they reached warehouse capacity before that point? What do they do then? Is it easier to move a smaller operation now, especially when you have been able to negotiate a surplus stock deal that can catapult you past that capacity before the year is even over? These are the sorts of questions that should be considered before criticising the plan and/or expecting the market to appreciate it. We're analysing the business to death, but the market is looking elsewhere, waiting to be told. That is also worth considering.

I agree that it doesn't immediately jump out that Boop or Nutricircle have more lines, but I also don't look that closely, and I am also aware that this is about the depth of stock in those lines, also. Note the 28th June video update where Martin talks about the right amount of stock (Twirl bars, protein bars).

This is the exact wording from the RNS,

"It is anticipated that the migration of stock and fulfilment operations will be completed before the end of Q3 2025, allowing us to be fully operational going into Q4 2025." Fully operational going into Q4 doesn't discourage being partially operational in Q3.

Food for thought if nothing else.

Apologies, an add-on thought.

If stock is being built up at THG already and they are accessing THG surplus stock, then the depth and breadth of the stock on offer should increase almost immediately. It will, I suspect, be countered by some stock being run down, which likely means lower prices. Did this commence in June? I have noted many more penny deals and free gifts on DD, which is where I would expect stock runoffs to occur the most. Hence why I said this is a reset. The above doesn't need to be 100% true, but it is an example of how progress can be affected by such a major strategic decision.

Logic says to me that Huddled management would want to access THG stock asap. That has to be balanced against delivery costs, but at c. £3 cost per delivery, there is room to swallow this over the short term, but the decision does have to be made with all factors in mind (I am sure I am making this sound simpler than it really is).

Hopefully, we will receive better insight into how this process will unfold through further video updates. It certainly warrants it.