Member Info for fleccy

"That article is dated 19 August"

Indeed it is Zesty and it's been linked to on here before:

"fleccy

Posts: 10,894

Price: 1.325

No Opinion

RE: Well I think it's obvious now......20 Aug 2023 00:32

The Bitcon.com article is just referencing the July article on Proactive.com, so nothing new. Just another pump article.

https://news.bitcoin.com/uk-researchers-claim-new-tech-supercharges-bitcoin-mining-with-260-faster-hash-detection-slashes-energy-use/

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1021620/quantum-blockchain-technologies-hard-at-work-after-filing-new-patent-application-1021620.html

Probably Vlad earning his Lunch."

I haven't lost any money Jambone, the size of my/our portfolio is growing year on year. The only way we'd lose money is if we sold at a loss, or the companies we're invested in go bust; In the meantime while our chosen stocks are cheap, all the dividends are going back into reinvestment.

The problem with a stock like QBT, without dividends, is that any top up requires fresh capital sourced elsewhere. Sure the companies we're invested in could stop paying dividends, but they're well financed Blue Chip companies so we'd be in a similar position to QBT investors who jumped in at 3, 4, or 5p under that circumstance. QBT has far more potential to double, triple, or quadruple than my investments, but it's also far more likely to go bust. Going off Qbelix's previous posts, it appears as though he's spent well over £100,000 on QBT stock, in fact probably more than we've invested in Vodafone which is our smallest investment, and also the one I view as having the highest risk to dividend payouts, but extremely unlikely to go bust. There's a reason you don't have to pay stamp duty on AIM stocks, it's because they are extremely high risk.

I speculate that QBT will struggle to make their SaaS work efficiently at the current Network Hashrate's and Bitcoin Difficulty.

There's no reason why they wont pay the dividend, dividends feed directly into the Net Debt calculation and is accounted for separately to free cash flow.

Select the right hand cash flow tab at the top left of the sheet and you can see the data and where I'm coming from. Drag the bar along to see the FY22/23 figures and the chart linked to yesterday:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSNxkKmgR2PzSL1NH5uvhJAIl6TyUm-PpH2hChEFWELeB8mLB-V562E7qRdDL0lOSa8NyAUBbokBjVp/pubhtml

There shouldn't be items like share buybacks in the current years figures, not sure about Spectrum and licences.

How did you know my eyes are green Bas? No jealousy here, I just enjoy watching this board. I have to say watching the ebb and flow of enthusiasm on here is far more entertaining than watching a science fiction film.

Jambone are you 10 years old, or just a complete fantasist? Unfortunately Don Quixote syndrome seems to be contagious on this board.

I wont be updating this chart with the upcoming Half Year results, but I will update it with the FY results next year. I posted a link to this earlier in the year, here it is again:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSNxkKmgR2PzSL1NH5uvhJAIl6TyUm-PpH2hChEFWELeB8mLB-V562E7qRdDL0lOSa8NyAUBbokBjVp/pubchart?oid=325944045&format=interactive

Notice the increase in Net Debt with acquisitions and the reduction in Net Debt with disposals. Capex remains mainly around the same level and free cash flow drops off in line with increased spending on spectrum and licenses. It gives a good idea of what to watch for in the results.

You're not pestering me Kris, I'm always open to sensible debate. I admit to having already made up my mind on Bitcoin and it would take some really compelling arguments to change my view. I can't get past the fact that the value of BTC is based purely on belief, with every use case falling away over time. If BTC does survive long term it'll only because enough people believe, so I'd liken it to religion rather than a monetary system; The argument that Fiat is also based on belief is only partly correct, since Fiat currency's are valued against the issuing country's economies and managed by the Central Banks.

Hi Kris, I've skimmed through your paper and tried to get the gist of where you're coming from. Clearly the biggest risk for an individual bank is a bank run, since as you point out in the case of Fractional Reserve Banking banks lend out a lot more than they receive in deposits; A bank run would quickly burn through the reserves and if they can't shore up their finances on the money markets, or loans from Central Banks, then it would kill them. Another risk for banks is defaults on loans, but they shouldn't hold a level of unsecured loans presenting a catastrophic risk. I also didn't notice any mention of LTV's in your paper, which are important with reference to secured mortgage and commercial loan risk, since loans with good LTV's would likely mean the banks could recover losses; A good example is the current headlines around Lloyds taking control of the Telegraph from the Barclay Family.

I don't hold the view that western countries will default, I've been around long enough to see things worse than the current situation, like the 1970's/80's/90's.

My reasoning for dismissing Bitcoin as a store of value is due to the value being based purely on belief, because:

The 21 million limit is manufactured, since the developers could just fork and create more tokens should they choose too

They could further subdivide Satoshi's creating even more sub tokens

Because BTC is manufactured, anyone can create their own Crypto, look at BSV forked from BTC

Proof of Work is flawed because it involves massive processing power using vast amounts of energy

As the reward reduces with each halving, the transaction charges would have to increase to maintain mining revenue in the absence of BTC price increases; Even transactions on the lightning network have to be added to the blockchain

Proof of stake is clearly the way to go backed by something tangible, proof of work is fundamentally flawed.

If you think countries will default and there's a risk of hyperinflation, the traditional proven hedges are more than adequate, I'm talking Equities, Gold, property and land, not crypto manufactured on a keyboard.

Mediman, what you're saying is its ok to make money at the expense of others. Why not make money by investing in something that provides a service, or is actually useful? As I said BTC's valuation is based entirely on the greater fool theory.

I've never heard of the tron network, but I suspect the eventual successful stable coins will be backed by real commodities, or Central Banks, and although they'll probably be exchangeable via the cloud they'll likely be regulated and centrally managed by institutions. I believe the current crypto crop will struggle to maintain value, since institutions can create their own crypto tokens on dedicated blockchains, so they'd have no need to use current traded DeFi tokens.

I have an open mind, tell me where the value is in BTC? The only use I can see is in currency exchange for entities who want to circumvent regulated finance, or as a background protocol for apps who deal in currency exchange; The problem with the currency exchange use case is that stable coins will fill that space in the not too distant future. Its volatility, transaction capacity and transaction charges make it useless as a currency. The Digital Gold/Oil narrative is flawed because a BTC token has no real world use and has no intrinsic value, the value is based purely on the greater fool theory.

BTC is being pumped higher on the back of an analyst report that there's a high chance of the ETF's being approved between now and the 17th November. BTC's whole valuation is based on hype, FOMO and manipulation, even if it got to $100,000 a Bitcoin it would eventually fail as it's a fundamentally flawed concept.

FG/QBT are really PUMPING out the hype at the moment, why is that? It seems like the X/twitter short videos are coming thick and fast. Must be Method D 😉

Just to add, we wouldn't pursue our reinvestment strategy if we didn't think it'd pay of at some point, as I said it's up to others what they do.

Obviously my timing was well off when I initially invested in BT at around £3, so you can easily argue it was a bad investment at that price, but that doesn't mean BT's a bad investment at £1.22. If i thought BT was a good price at £3, why wouldn't I believe it's a bargain at the current price? It could still test £1.10 and we may still decide to make our next top up in BT, or elsewhere if we decide to, but all that doesn't take away from dividend reinvestment as a valid investing strategy. I don't make recommendations, I just point out what we do, so you should wind your neck since your arguments and logic are flawed. Anyone who blindly copies others on here should stop and do their own research first, which is what I'd say to anyone who'd ask me what I do. I'm not sure what your investment strategy is Mandy, as far as I can tell the only thing you invest in is criticism of others.

Jambone and Addison if QBT have tested on the live network, why haven't they published the stats associated with those live tests, in addition to the animations?

Are you guys religious'? you seem to have a lot of faith in the WORD, rather than SUBSTANCE. Where's the evidence that QBT's software will work on the live BTC network? I haven't seen it.

Mandy, my initial investment in BT was around £3 a share and my average cost per share now is well below £2. Every top up reduces my average cost per share and the lower the price the more each top up brings the average down. It isn't rocket science Mandy. As far as the dividend history is concerned, what difference does it make? You're the only one who keeps bring it up, you don't see me crying about it.

Indeed Phat, it's an interesting chart, I made it purely to demonstrate the power of reinvestment. It's highly unlikely a share price would stay stagnant for 30 years, but it shows how the Fleccy2 curve pulls away from the Fleccy1 curve over time. The break even point for Fleccy2 is between year 9 and 10, year 19 is where Fleccy2 starts wiping the floor with Fleccy1.