Member Info for fleccy

"currently 91.18 and it could get even worse, sorry mate but i think there's better places to invest than this share and if the dividend is cut it could be a long journey getting back over a £1, even Lloyds is looking good right now"

I already own over 400,000 Lloyds shares, are you implying there's something wrong with Lloyds? At some point, like Lloyds, the Vodafone share price will start the road to price recovery. As far as Vodafone dropping the dividend, I'd expect an initial market shake out dip, but the price will soon start climbing from there and take out £1 in short order. Vodafone isn't in any distress, the market would soon rerate the stock if Vod signaled a significant debt reduction strategy. A lot is made of Vod's debt, but little mention of last year's €45.58 billion Revenue and €5.4 billion free cash flow. Reading some of the posts, on here, you'd think Vodafone is on the verge of going bust, which it clearly isn't.

"A very high risk putting too much of your hard earned money into this disappointing share i think, definitely wouldn't want to risk too much here, seems like Mikey has been right all along"

Where are the risks Rob? The worst I'd expect is a dividend cut and that would likely support the share price, since the market's priced a cut in anyway. For someone looking for a relatively safe capital gain, Vodafone would be a no brainer at these prices. Personally I prefer to invest in Dividend stocks, but I'd just continue to hold if Vodafone cut the dividend.

"Have you read the balance sheet?"

Ok I've just taken a quick look at the Annual report and I can see the Accumulated losses Row in the Equity calculation, and I can see the loss has increased since last year, reducing Equity, but I don't understand the point you're making? It doesn't mean the Equity wont increase next year, or in subsequent years. If Vodafone stop the dividend, which I half expect they will, it just means the dividend will go into debt reduction and still benefit shareholders, just in a different way.

"Currently €122.5bn of losses have been accumulated.
It comes from trading losses over the years and payouts to investors (divs and buybacks), so tells you they have never generated the excess to be paying out to investors, so have in reality had to borrow the money to do it."

A tax loss carryover is a way for companies to reduce their tax bill, all Telecom companies carry debt for varying reasons. You're being very naughty Mr Mole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvsUCkRGdTk

"Bitcoin, after all, handles data properly. FX for one, does not."

Probably explains why North Korea loves Crypto so much, they need to fund their missile program somehow.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/01/tech/crypto-hacks-2022/index.html

"the 2 will exist alongside one another ... thats a FACT !"

Why's that? Is it because the vested interests are trying to market Bitcoin as a commodity? Which it clearly isn't.
Currencies need stability; Bitcoin has proved itself to be a speculative high risk punt, it serves no other purpose than a bet on the price increasing, and therefore has no utility value.

"Rishi Sunak's pro-crypto stance has been rejoiced by crypto fans around the world"

Sunak will go with whatever the treasury, FCA and BOE recommend, he wouldn't risk a Liz Truss type event.

Exactly Daffy, a Central Bank Stable coin. The current Crypto players are terrified of Central Banks producing their own tokens, since they'll be pegged to the Fiat currency they're backed by; They'll be less volatile and more easily traded.

"Good luck all - hopefully a nice blue day tomorrow"

Speak for yourself, I want to do a divi top up next week.

"I think the jist of it Fleccy , is that , much to your angst ,,,, crypto / de-fi will sit alongside Trad-fi going fwd ... even our dear 'hidebound' HMG see that"

We'll see, regulation could easily kill Crypto. Lets be honest, would you pay over $100,000 for a link to a cartoon picture of a Monkey? NFT's are just another fraud under the Crypto umbrella. There are some uses for certain Central Bank stable coins, but DeFi, Bitcoin, NFT's, etc are just hyped up rubbish. If you were that way inclined you could create a Crypto coin like Bitcoin, doing the same thing, so that suggests the "asset" is worthless.
As I've pointed out in previous posts, there are companies out there that included Blockchain in their name and saw their stock price rise on the back of it, so the industry is clearly in a state of irrational exuberance.
As an example Long Island Iced Tea Corp changed their name to Long Blockchain Corp:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Blockchain_Corp

Can you think of any other companies that reinvented themselves with a change of direction and name change?

I mentioned Binance in previous post, as an example of an unregulated offshore exchange, did you know why they don't trade in the UK?

"In 2021, the United Kingdom’s watchdog, Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), banned Binance Markets Limited from undertaking any regulated activity in the region, citing weak measures to protect clients. The ban follows their withdrawal from registering with the FCA in May 2021, claiming they wouldn’t meet strict anti-money laundering requirements."

The above says it all, Binance wont register with the FCA under the existing regulatory regime, do you think UK regulation will make it easier or harder for Crypto Exchanges to comply with Financial regulations?

It's interesting news, much will depend on the detail. I noticed a few key points in the article:

"Most importantly, the framework must cover firms that have no onshore presence but which continue to offer services to UK customers.”

“A number of these proposals are well trailed, but others perhaps less so and it is evident that the shadow cast by high profile failures through 2022 has influenced the extent and pace of implementation of these measures,”

The first point, referring to offshore firms like Binance, is important. Will this result in offshore based firms being banned from selling to UK clients? Since they'll need to prove they aren't involved in any fraud or manipulation. How do you regulate onshore Crypto companies, when Crypt asset prices can be manipulated in unregulated exchanges offshore? If a UK based exchange goes bust, will the customers be covered by the FSCS? My guess is probably not.
Any UK based Exchange will probably be required to hold Fiat cash equivalent assets, within the UK, well in excess of any tokens traded, since Crypto coins are highly volatile high risk investments. It's clear that the regulatory environment will make any UK Crypto Exchange uncompetitive against unregulated offshore exchanges, but they may do well if investors feel safer trading on them.
My personal view is that it should all be banned, or treated as gambling, since Crypto Tokens could be likened to chips in a casino, they're ok for playing the game but useless for anything else.

"BT tomorrow which will also be ****"

Slight exaggeration, BT's capex and cost saving strategy has been well telegraphed for a couple of years now. I'm invested in both BT and Vodafone, only slightly more in BT, but I have more confidence in BT's strategy and their direction of travel. Vodafone need to find a CEO as good as Jansen appears to be at BT.
It suits me for BT to drop, as that's where I'm currently targeting my dividend top-ups and only holding Vodafone. I have a lot of confidence that BT's bottom line will grow over the coming years, irrespective of small declines in revenue.

"BT Group and SPL look to the stratosphere to deliver 4G and 5G coverage to hard-to-reach areas of the UK"

https://newsroom.bt.com/bt-group-and-spl-look-to-the-stratosphere-to-deliver-4g-and-5g-coverage-to-hard-to-reach-areas-of-the-uk/

There are a couple of things happening over the next week, retail investors will see some dividend payouts and popular retail stocks are reporting results. Some of the articles are designed with click-bait headlines, initially listing positives, but suddenly turning negative and saying I prefer this or that stock instead. Retail investors are easily manipulated, which is why everyone should do their own research and reach their own conclusions.
It suits me that BT's share price is currently dropping, next week I'll have a good chunk of BT and Vodafone Dividends looking for a top up home.

Honestly, some of the stuff I read in the media about BT's debt. It really is misleading to say BT has £19 Billion Net Debt, even though BT results list it that way.

https://www.fool.co.uk/2023/01/30/the-bt-share-price-is-up-but-theres-still-a-6-dividend-yield/

The author says:
"I suspect it’s largely for the same reason I won’t buy. I don’t think they’re undervalued, I just think they reflect some downsides that lie behind the headlines. And it all comes down, essentially, to debt.
At 30 September 2022, BT’s net debt stood at a whopping £19bn. That was £800m worse than the same point a year previously. And to put it into some perspective, it’s 1.4 times the company’s total market cap at the time of writing."

So Alan Oscroft says he wont invest in BT, because "I just can’t bring myself to buy into a company with so much debt", but does BT have "a whopping £19bn" of debt as stated in the article?
In my opinion BT doesn't have "a whopping £19bn" of debt, it has Net Financial Debt of £13.485 Billion and Lease Liabilities of £5.557 Billion.
The reason the media report BT as having £19 Billion of debt, is due to the way BT accounts for its Lease Liabilities under IFRS. IFRS accounts for lease liabilities as Financial long-term debt, whereas IAS doesn't account for operating leases as financial debt. As an example Vodafone list their Lease Liabilities separately from their Financial Debt, when you read articles they'll talk about Vodafone's Net debt of €41.578 Billion without a mention of the €12.539 Billion lease liabilities, because Vodafone report them separately. The media should differentiate the different types of debt, when reporting, if they're going to use it to persuade readers from investing in a stock, otherwise it paints the wrong picture.

There's no rule stopping Directors, CEO's, or employee's from buying shares in the company they're connected to. There are rules to prevent people within the company, with access to insider information, from trading during a close period, usually 2 months prior to the release of Results.

"I know you have all filtered fleccy and don't know what he has been saying but he has changed his tune,"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOdjCb4LwQY

Anyone want to pay $109,826.05 for the right to use this Bored Ape Yacht Club image on your Facebook page?

https://opensea.io/assets/ethereum/0xbc4ca0eda7647a8ab7c2061c2e118a18a936f13d/4656

If you prefer a pixelated Cryptopunk image, this one could be yours for a mere $120,000:

https://opensea.io/assets/ethereum/0xb47e3cd837ddf8e4c57f05d70ab865de6e193bbb/1513

Not a bad price for something like a character for a 1980's computer game.

I've decided I might be able to make some money out of this.
This pixelated pic of me must be worth a fortune:

https://i.postimg.cc/vZzzxt7K/Cryptome-jpg.jpg

And here's something I've thrown together for fans of Crypto and Ice-Cream. I wonder how much it'll be worth if marketed as an NFT?

https://i.postimg.cc/pT8krbsf/Crypto.png

Ok you guys don't like my opinion, fair enough, but if you're really interested in the subject of Bitcoin, as I am, this is interesting stuff. As the saying goes, Do Your Own Research.

First off, here's an article with three interesting charts:

https://theconversation.com/bitcoin-has-shot-up-50-since-the-new-year-but-heres-why-new-lows-are-probably-still-ahead-198682

The first chart, with the heading "Retail investor behaviour", shows retail investors with 1 or more Bitcoin have indeed been adding BTC, with the number of addresses increasing significantly since the FTX collapse.
The second chart, "Institutional investor behaviour pt 1", charts number of addresses with with 1000 Bitcoin or more, and they saw a big spike up around March 2022; Maybe someone could shed some light on the March 2022 spike up? Interestingly it was reported in February that the US seized/recovered 94,000 Bitcoin, out of 120,000 stolen from Bitfinex in a 2016 hack. Since the March 2022 spike up, the number of Bitcoin addresses with 1000 or more bitcoin have tracked the price down and levelling off around December.
The chart, "Institutional investor behaviour pt 2", shows the number of wallet address with 10,000 or more Bitcoin, the chart shows a spike up around the FTX collapse, but appears to be tailing off.
The article suggests "the biggest institutional investors have been offloading", so it's worth a read, but draw your own conclusions.

Here's a useful site with lots of Crypto information and charts to peruse.

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/charts#market%20signals

"Btw Fleecy if you think your fooling anyone with your new persona please think again , but it’s good to have exposed why you are so bitter towards Bitcoin"

PMSL, are you suggesting that me and musicman are one and the same?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOdjCb4LwQY