Member Info for fleccy

Once the shares are purchased and BT's delisted, shareholders would receive the agreed price paid per share into their share dealing accounts, alternatively if they hold paper shares they may receive a cheque or cash via Bank transfer; And that'd be the end of it as far as BT shareholders are concerned.

Apparently MicroStrategy bought another $600 Million worth in November, in my opinion they're painting themselves into a corner. If MicroStrategy ever have to sell large chunks of their BTC holdings, for whatever reason, the wallet watchers will see it immediately and it could spark a wider sell off. Generally the higher BTC goes, the more resistance it'll face due to Hodlers cashing in. The only thing currently pushing it higher is the speculative money chasing the hype around possible US Spot ETF gains. The tree huggers are also massing forces to battle BTC.

Dan it's just meant to demonstrate the compounding power of dividend reinvestment and how a reduction in the share price buys more stock when dividends are reinvested, it isn't meant to be a real world example. Something else to consider is that Fleccy2 pulls in dividend income of £14,633.34 in year 18, whereas Fleccy1 only brings in dividend income of £7,599.37 in the same year.

Here's a chart showing the growth in dividend income with each passing year of reinvestment. It really demonstrates the differences between the two, with Fleccy2's dividend returns pulling further away from Fleccy1's year on year:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRYwu6rv7Vk2093vnE9975iJIfiNBDGYW08VmYU2MK2tsi0o9bA3rDwV9NV0XA6QJrkQeqet_jppwWg/pubchart?oid=305726335&format=interactive

Mandy If a bid for BT was accepted and passed by the Government, there'd be nothing left to buy into. When companies are taken over they're delisted and either go into private ownership, or are absorbed into the company taking them over. If BT was taken over it would cease to exist as a tradeable entity.

I don't have an issue with BT being taken over as long as it remains under UK ownership. There's a long history of UK utilities being taken over by foreign companies, and sweated for dividends before being eventually sold off after years of underinvestment. UK infrastructure takeovers by foreign entities haven't worked out well for the customers or UK PLC.

"New yellow snow and ice weather warnings for swathes of UK"

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/new-yellow-snow-and-ice-weather-warnings-for-swathes-of-uk/ar-AA1kP1B8?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=7dc683eb03874f5dbb9124a8a352fad3&ei=23

This is what happens when they close all the public lavatories,

"Ps 22 million mkt cap hmmm"

The market cap has no relevance if an entity was doing due diligence and considering a buyout. Any prospective purchaser would take a close look at what they're getting for their money, and wouldn't base their own valuation on the speculative AIM share price.

Addi as far as I can tell there isn't a company to buy. Last time I checked QBT has 4 employee's, which suggests the teams working on the various algorithms aren't full time employee's. It appears as though the research team members receive expenses and the promise of share options, but aren't contracted full time employee's; I'll stand corrected on that if anyone can offer proof otherwise. There are no patents, so no Intellectual Property to sell, therefore until some sort of infrastructure is built, deployed and earning revenue, I don't see how QBT could be sold/acquired.

"Fleccy. It is pure fantasy, making the assumption that the sp falls by 50% in 1st year & then continues to rise for the next 29years. "

Does that mean you don't disagree with the alternate reality part of my example then Dan?

Actually you misunderstood the chart, the share price or dividend rate doesn't rise for Fleccy1, or Fleccy2; Fleccy1's share price stays at £2 for 31 years and Fleccy2's share price remains at £1 for the 31 years, both Fleccy's receive annual dividends of 7.7p per share. The reason Fleccy2's shares rise on a steeper curve is because he can buy more shares at £1 per share than Fleccy1 can at £2, and because Fleccy2 is adding shares at a much faster rate than Fleccy1 he increases his future dividends and shareholding at an exponentially faster rate, allowing him to catch up and eventually overtake Fleccy1.

The whole idea of the chart was supposed to demonstrate an easy to understand example of how dividend reinvestment gives an enhanced return as the share price drops.

By year 30 Fleccy1 owns 155,298 shares worth £310,595.40 and Fleccy2 owns 462,851 shares worth £462,850.89, so Fleccy2's portfolio is worth £152,255.49 more than Fleccy1's, even though Fleccy2's stock price halved in the first year compared to Fleccy1's.

Rob, did I ever show you the chart for fleccy1 and fleccy2, and the effect of reinvesting dividends when the price drops?

Fleccy1 and Fleccy2 live in alternate universes and they both buy £100,000 in a company stock, they then annually reinvest the dividends over 30 years following the initial £100,000 investment. Fleccy2 (possibly me 🫤) see's the share price drop by half in the first year, with both Fleccy's then seeing the stock price stagnate for the whole reinvestment period.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRYwu6rv7Vk2093vnE9975iJIfiNBDGYW08VmYU2MK2tsi0o9bA3rDwV9NV0XA6QJrkQeqet_jppwWg/pubchart?oid=1399088825&format=interactive

Because the price halves for Fleccy2 his dividend reinvestment buys twice the shares of Fleccy1's reinvestment, his portfolio grows more quickly and eventually overtakes Fleccy1's portfolio where the price remained the same. The idea of the chart is to demonstrate the power of compounding using dividend reinvestment when the price drops. It's an exaggerated example, but nicely demonstrates what I'm talking about.

Rob, “the stock market is a device to transfer money from the impatient to the patient.”

The Block Listing of 743,000,000 shares doesn't appear to be showing in this months Total Voting Rights. The figure shows an increase of only 5,483,717 for November.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vS0oSavIsBjHgD7k6NMyk7Z591Cm2IrevvLI-Jq95gOmESrOI0Vi_NhA8LIO9rMz90Y5zCOCoFuEItG/pubchart?oid=1812824850&format=interactive

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vS0oSavIsBjHgD7k6NMyk7Z591Cm2IrevvLI-Jq95gOmESrOI0Vi_NhA8LIO9rMz90Y5zCOCoFuEItG/pubchart?oid=1451011517&format=interactive

My wife has shares in a standard share dealing account, but she's a non earner and the dividends generated there come in below the income tax threshold of £12,570. We also have two ISA's which house the rest of our shares. The total admin charge for both sets of accounts is £72 a year (£36 each). £72 a year is insignificant considering the dividend income.

Deutsche Telekom's average cost per share is well over £4, they have written that down somewhat and stashed the holding into their pension scheme, but they considered BT shares as worth that at the time. Their CEO recently characterised it as a mistake, but that price is locked in for them. £4 a share is La La land until it isn't. I have high hopes for my BT investment once the current capex cycle ends, job cuts feed through and then later when the building closure program fully kicks in. As you can probably guess, I'm looking at BT for at least the next 10 years.

Mandy I've already stated that I'd sell in the event of a bid and buy back in once it's blocked or turned down.

"Talk about my glass is always half full, i bet you always see yours as 3/4 full fleccy mate"

I'm stuck in awaiting a delivery so I thought I'd respond to you Rob.

If I was to use a similar metaphor, I'd describe it as a glass that tops itself up year on year. I realise that dividends take time to compensate for large drops in share prices, where drops leave investors sitting on paper losses, but they do give choices. After this latest Vodafone top up the dividends across all our holdings should bring in over £27,600 tax free, assuming all the dividends are maintained going forward, if I remove the yearly Vodafone dividend income the other holdings bring in just over £19,000; The dividends give me the choice to grow the holdings through reinvestment, or use the cash for other things, which is why I decided to invest in dividend paying stocks.

UK stocks have been hammered for years and Telecom stocks doubly so, will that situation persist forever? I don't think it will, and as the saying goes all boats rise when the tide comes in.

Because I don't care what you think Zesty.

Indeed Expat, but in the meantime we have the divi's.

I've already explained, on many occasions, that Fiat is valued against the strength of the economy of the issuing country; Bitcoin's valuation is based purely on belief. Proof of Work is a flawed concept and Bitcoin has failed every single use case touted to justify its existence. Anything Bitcoin can do, the current existing systems can do better so what use is Bitcoin? We already have digital money, I can't remember the last time I used cash; We have debit/credit cards and payment/banking apps that work and do a good job. In African countries phone apps like M-Pesa are used by millions of users who already use their mobiles for transacting, including across borders, and those facilities have been available for years. If Third World countries can already trade electronically using tried and tested technology, what's the point of Bitcoin? If you don't believe me Google M-Pesa.

The last remaining narrative used to justify the existence of Bitcoin, is to describe it as Digital Gold or as a store of value, but that's just a fake narrative and also doomed to fail unless the "Powers That Be" decide to recognise it and force it into the mainstream.

"in simple terms, miners audit transactions in exchange for an opportunity to acquire the digital currency. but they compete against each other to complete that audit first - meaning the same transaction is being worked on many times over, by multiple powerful and power hungry computers.

"you have millions of devices around the world, constantly competing with each other in a massive game of what i like to describe as 'guess the number'," mr de vries told the bbc. "all of these machines combined are generating 500 *****illion guesses every second of the day, non stop - that is 500 with 18 zeros behind it." this method is known as "proof of work". but a change to the way bitcoin works could cut the electricity use and hence water consumption dramatically. the major cryptocurrency ethereum did this in sep 2022, moving to a system called "proof of stake", reducing its power-use by more than 99% in the process. that may not be straightforward though, according to prof james davenport, of the university of bath. "[it was] only possible because the management of ethereum is significantly more centralised than that of bitcoin," he told the bbc. nonetheless, others say the findings of this research are worrying. dr larisa yarovaya, associate professor of finance at the university of southampton, she said the use of freshwater for bitcoin mining, particularly in regions already grappling with water scarcity, "should be a cause for concern among regulators and the public"."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-67564205

Expat you're correct that the future's uncertain, but you can weigh the probability of certain outcomes. BT is a currently cost cutting play with prospects to grow the Net Earnings bottom line, but little chance of growth in revenue. At some point in the future there may be opportunities to grow revenue, but that isn't certain.