Member Info for fleccy

Jambone I find you pathetic attempts at insults hilarious, it goes to show how small minded and dumb you are, especially if you think it has any affect on me. If it makes you feel better, then by all means carry on, but it doesn't change the fact that commercial Quantum Bitcoin mining is unlikely to ever happen.

"FG, our CEO who is a professor in computers and will know exactly what is going on as per previous interviews where they are actively tracking quantum computing and breakthroughs"

I'm sure he has a very good idea of how far away commercial Quantum computing is, he isn't going to give his true opinion though is he.

"LSE have a section under report a post that says for disruptive, that exactly what you are. You post out dated info which shows you want to get a you have a negative agenda here!"

You're the one throwing insults, like calling me "Flaccid", or saying things like "a limp dick like you who can only get a hardon every time the price moves up". I would suggest you're the one being disruptive with your insults, but that's what idiots resort to when they haven't got a good counter argument. Clearly you're the Troll Jambone, not me. Just because you say my information is outdated, doesn't make it so; You should learn how to use a search engine, you might learn something.

"Perhaps a smart move could have been BT and others saying this year it will only be the 3.9% and not add on inflation."

If that was the case, how would BT account for the larger pay rises they've had to dish out, and the higher energy and equipment purchasing costs impacting them? The above inflation increase in bills might lift revenue, but it will only have a limited impact on the bottom line for the current year. The smart move is to use the agreed formula.

"Technology grows quicker with every year that passes and the time frames you mention will only come down, and rapidly. I think even you can appreciate that."

It's Fleccy. Where did I say Quantum computers wont happen? My exact words were:
"I'm also a realist and small breakthroughs today don't mean a commercial computer will become available in the next 5 years."
"Taking the cost per Qubit into account, commercial Quantum computing is a long way in the future."

Both IBM and Google are predicting they'll each build a million Qubit computer by 2029, 6 years away, spending Billions to get there; They are both at the forefront of the technology, with deep pockets to achieve their goals, and once built it's unlikely Quantum computer time will be allocated for Bitcoin mining. As far as Quantum computing becoming cheap enough for applications like Bitcoin Mining, you are possibly talking 20 years away. Anyone thinking Quantum computers will be used for Bitcoin mining are probably deluding themselves, unless some secret breakthrough makes cheap Qubit technology available, for mass production, very very soon.
I've never owned a Blackberry, or an Iphone, I wont pay Apple's ridiculous prices, so I'm currently an Android user.

"But Flaccid says we won’t have Quantum computers for years with the 1989google article he read"

Clearly Jambonead, you disagree with my view since you have a vested interest in presenting anything as imminent that might pump your investment. I am genuinely interested in anything Quantum, so I would love to see commercial Quantum computers asap, but I'm also a realist and small breakthroughs today don't mean a commercial computer will become available in the next 5 years. To put it in financial terms, currently it costs around $10,000 to produce a single Qubit, so a 1000 Qubit computer would cost around $10 Million and a million Qubit computer around $10 Billion. For Quantum computers to become commercially useful, you probably need closer to a million Qubits than the minimum of 1000 Qubits.
Taking the cost per Qubit into account, commercial Quantum computing is a long way in the future.

I saw that article and could only assume the author is intentionally expressing a vested interest negative view. He talks about returns on investment, but just because their stock prices are low now, it doesn't mean they wont recover in the future. The article's correct that Telecom stocks currently underperform the broader index's over time, but much depends on when an investor jumps into the stocks and the trajectory of price recovery.
What the author fails to mention is that Telecom companies supply essential network services, which all the so called "High Growth" Tech Giants are totally dependent on to provide their services. As far as big tech's concerned, which I suspect the author is a fan of, it appears they're being lined up to feel regulatory wrath throughout the World, you can see the start with Meta told to sell Giphy and the CMA raising barriers to the Microsoft Activision deal. Also various regulators are looking at the amount of bandwidth big tech utilises, and looking at ways to somehow make them them pay for their excessive bandwidth requirements. As the author said, Telecoms is already highly regulated, it seems regulatory focus is moving off Telecoms and onto the Tech Giants.

"An RNS needed. This article puts the shareholdings in VOD favour over Aditya vs articles yesterday."

The article linked to today is most likely correct, I did point out, on Monday at 13:58, that the previous articles may have got it the wrong way around; It appears the previous article really ****ed up the figures.

This paragraph, from the most recent article, explains it well:

"Vi’s co-promoters, UK's Vodafone Plc and India's Aditya Birla Group, will own 31.7% and 18.2% respectively in Vi, post allotment of shares to the government, taking their combined stake to around 50%. At present, UK’s Vodafone and ABG own 47.61% and 27.38% respectively in Vi."

"Fleecy- you are not invested. So I need to understand why you post here day on day out"

I wasn't intending to post anything this afternoon, but you mentioned me and insist on spelling my username wrong, so don't be surprised when I respond.

"the fact remains .... ,,, QBT are 'partnered' with these people (Dr Hensinger & team) .... RKB confirmed pre - Xmas .... so very good news indeed (potentially ) ! Puts us in a good position to bring it all together ..."

Because RKB says so? Show me a link to an article, or public statement from the company relating to the quoted information above. In the absence of proof, at best, the above can only be interpreted as hearsay.
Even if it's true, viable Quantum computers are years away, maybe even a decade or more, and in the event of a couple of Quantum computers becoming viable, it's unlikely time will be allocated for Bitcoin mining. As one poster pointed out this morning, I think, by the time commercially available Quantum computers become common, either the last Bitcoin will have been mined, or there'll be very few left to mine. In my opinion, anything stated in relation to Quantum computing is unlikely to lead to revenue for QBT.

Eddie and Fleecy will never change but you are better than they are.

Sooty, I've only been honest. QBT is a super high risk bet in my opinion. All QBT's updates are along the lines of testing, testing, testing. They might be talking to ASIC manufacturers, but there's no detail on the ASIC's they've used in their mining test rigs and there's no guarantee their software will be implemented at scale by large miners.
Why is it wrong for me, as a bystander, to warn prospective investors to be cautious, when vested interest posters regularly paste the same ramping content on a daily basis? The fact I'm not invested in QBT, and have no intention of investing in the company shouldn't invalidate my opinion, in fact my opinion should carry more weight since I have no current or future vested interest to shape my view.
It's hypocritical for vested interest posters to criticise my opinion, just because they think it might affect the opinion of readers of the forum. All opinions should be allowed, without criticism or abuse, but you guys are acting like salesmen pumping and pushing a product and attempting to suppress anything you don't want others to read.

"All unravelling for the altnets - why would anyone want to actually invest in these now? - no revenue prospects, no scale and no hope left soon"

I think a couple may survive and eventually consolidate into one, much like the cable companies of the 80's/90's, but there'll be some pain along the way. I suspect there'll be 3 big players in the end.

"But what's funny is dsflat takes a dump and fleccy swallows and stays quite."

I have no idea what you're talking about, I haven't swallowed anything. As far as my opinion on FG's interviews, I don't really see the point in doing a "Were still here" style interview with nothing concrete to add.
I agree with others of the opinion that there was nothing new from the November updates. Investing in an R&D focused company carries the risk that the Research wont lead to big revenue, whether in tech, Pharma or anything else. The only updates that'll really matter will be the one's advising on the software being adopted by miners, and sustainable revenue streams opening up. In the end it always comes down to earnings.

"UK altnets slam Ofcom BT wholesale tariff approval"

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/365530104/UK-altnets-slam-Ofcom-BT-wholesale-tariff-approval

https://www.inca.coop/news/ofcom-disappointing-stance-equinox2

"That suggests the going is getting a bit tough for the altnet which, having changed its name from Call Flow Solutions to Trooli"

https://www.telecomtv.com/content/access-evolution/uk-fibre-altnets-face-2023-squeeze-46604/

"Trooli is among the largest of the UK’s fibre upstarts. It is not the only one to be facing challenges."

https://www.telcotitans.com/network-and-infrastructure/uk-altnet-trooli-hires-restructuring-guru-as-sale-talk-resurfaces/6171.article

"king has 1 is of course spot on Fleccy … the narcissistic behaviour of such fools like yerself is astounding"

PAS, KingHas1 pops out of the woodwork now and again and makes statements teasing a response, only a fool couldn't see his motivation, which probably explains you defending him. PAS if you're going to make comments about other peoples intelligence, you should learn to interpret the motivation behind the content in other peoples post's.
You guys praise ramping, while attempting to shoot down any post presenting QBT's true fundamentals, which are rubbish, probably because you think comments on here somehow influence the share price, which they don't. QBT's daily trade volume rarely drops below 2 million and often exceeds 10 million, do you really think a comment on here would affect the price with that level of volume? Also the constant ramping reeks of desperation, you guys need to look into relaxation therapy, or seek medical advice about suitable medication.

"I was convinced BT would do really well in an inflationary environment"

BT's undervalued, simple as that. The easiest way to make money out of BT is invest while the price is low, reinvest dividends while the price is still low, and wait for sentiment to change as the transformation cost savings add to the bottom line. Anyone can see the value locked up in BT, you just have to read the results and reports. The market vested interest media chooses to present a false narrative, exaggerating debt and the competition threat, but the narrative will change within the next couple of years.

"As a result of this, the Aditya Birla Group’s stake will stand at 31.8%, while Vodafone Plc’s stake will be at 18.3%."

This is different than reported back in January, I thought it was going to be the other way around with Aditya Birla Group owning 17.8% and Vodafone's stake reducing to 28.5%, post the Government equity deal. If this article's correct, Vodafone's stake will drop from 47.6% to 18.3%, whereas the Aditya Birla Group stake will actually increase. If the article hasn't got it the wrong way around, then there must have been some sort of deal around Aditya Birla Group injecting a large amount of fresh capital, with Vodafone maybe agreeing to take the biggest shareholding hit.

"Blackrock have taken a 8% stake in silvergate bank this week which has gone somewhat under the radar and is massive vote of confidence in the crypto industry"

I bet the investment is covered in some way, Silvergate's future depends on Crypto staging a large price recovery. Silvergate is currently loss making and a high risk play for anyone interested in the stock.
Governments are likely discussing the future of unbacked Crypto, and working out how to deflate it without receiving undue criticism; They'll probably introduce their own Crypto's and ensure the like of Bitcoin decline into insignificance.

"BTC expected to hit $250k within three years. Remember BTC is a finite quantity.
Black rock already on board . Get ready"

BTC isn't a finite quantity, that's a fake narrative put out there to fool people; For a start it can be subdivided into infinitesimally small parts, making the quantity of BTC tokens irrelevant; Then there are other Crypto's doing exactly the same thing, also created on a keyboard in short order and capable of being coded to ensure fake limited availability,
Blackrock isn't investing in Bitcoin, they're adding cash settled bitcoin futures traded on commodity exchanges registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Also because these are a form of derivative, Blackrock could just as easily bet on the price of Bitcoin falling, as it could on the price of Bitcoin rising.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/012215/how-invest-bitcoin-exchange-futures.asp

"This opens the door for retail trading of other cryptos."

Retail investors are already trading Crypto's, as are companies like Tesla and MicroStrategy. The problem the Crypto industry has, is that unregulated Crypto "currencies" can't currently be held in investment and pension funds. The reason the Crypto industry has been pushing for regulation, is to legalise Crypto assets for inclusion in mainstream Fund Portfolios, but it's highly unlikely regulators would allow such speculative unbacked crypto assets to be added to the mix. Leading up to the 2008 Financial Crisis subprime mortgages packaged with Prime mortgages, in CDO's, led to contagion and the near collapse of the whole financial system, they are never going to allow Crypto to grow to the point of becoming a systemic risk through contagion.
It's clear the vested interests, and especially the Whales, want to tap into the Trillion Dollar fund market to infuse more cash into Crypto tokens, to inflate their prices, I can't see the regulators ever allowing that.