Member Info for Globex

He does say some strange things. Becoming a bit like an embarrassing uncle when you hope he doesn't say something too madcap each time they wheel him out.

Between them they have positions hundreds of shares, it's inevitable that on any given day someone could dig up examples of a certain stocks they own falling. Isolated examples don't indicate anything at all. More representative would be a bigger picture, like for example Wace partners sharing £538m profit last year.

If you're going to try and call people morons at least learn how to use an apostrophe correctly first.

Despite the pump today this hit an all time low yesterday, after someone dumped 46,000,000 shares at 0.0174p. Seems to me that far from being morons, those bearish on the stock have if anything been quite prescient.

Burrows was paid £588k in 2023 (the latest period they've given details for), plus retirement benefits, plus hundreds of thousands of warrants. Annual report has details, including his daughter's remuneration.

His total salary last year was already an increase of more than 15% from £506k the previous year, so for this year assume it's increased from the £588k further still.

I would also say for the savings they're making, that 20% cut in annual operating costs they outlined is extremely high. I would actually defy anyone to find any other plc making cuts greater than this within a single financial year, so a bit ludicrous that poster complaining on this front.

Saying BCH has the same genesis block as bitcoin is misleading mate, when it was created out of thin air in 2017 by forking bitcoin they were simply cloning the existing blockchain history up to that point, including first block, before tweaking the code and giving it a new name.

Some more good news on the Craig Wright front

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/legal/judge-imposes-worldwide-asset-freeze-on-fake-satoshi-craig-wright

I think a tipping point may be reached when IBIT has more than GBTC, can't be all that far away now, currently 254k vs 333k.

@CB Clsk certainly were heavy on the acquisition talk. Not sure what they have to gain by being so blatant, maybe seeking forgiveness for the ATM. For all the talk of M&A across miners the surprising thing to me is how little consolidation there's been. Post-halving activity bound to pick up you'd think.

As of 31st March they report a cash balance of £23.4 million. In January they guided FY24 revenue to be £80-95 million, today's RNS maintains that. They have also previously given target of 20% reduction in annual operating costs - you should assume job losses are a part of that. Based on all this they have more than enough cash on hand to see through this year, before their target of break even FY25.

Novogratz said 200 on that vid but to be honest I don't really trust him, higher than they say officially, so much bs on youtube, but mainly sensed he's a bit of a wrongun because of his Luna tattoo.

Where it gets a bit messy and typical lack of forward planning is the loan term was 36 months, so if the hosting agreement did terminate, they'd still have another 12 months of payments, but at that point without the revenue to cover them.

The machines were put down as collateral as part of that loan. Seems checkmate to Galaxy whichever way you look at it, I think they keep this site for themselves and use it to hype up their own share price, they're already on that path.

That's funny, to the average Galaxy follower that must seem totally cryptic but all too real from the perspective of PW era Argo.

Galaxy seem to be making an awful lot of noise about Texas lately. Reading the smoke signals it can't bode well for Argo's renewal chances. Novogratz has to be all to aware of the miner premium and benefits of claiming a bigger piece for themselves.

Galaxy are claiming to have expanded Helios, so would have their own rigs in the expanded parts. In below link 'Proprietary' refers to themselves (rated at 1.9 EH), then 'Hosted' is Argo at 2.2EH.

https://investor.galaxy.com/news/news-details/2024/Galaxy-Announces-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2023-Financial-Results/default.aspx

I keep coming back to Tenner saying: "Some shareholders actually didn't want us to return anything."

I find this comment amazing. If any shareholder did say that, it would have been highly unrepresentative, so why go public with it? Why is it that any time he's not given a script he manages to make some new verbal clanger?

He's lucky he didn't get a grilling on this, shows it's a paid for article via the flashy PR, not just because a minnow like this with barely any revenue isn't newsworthy, but the softball questions. On this point alone should have been asked about the payment being lower than promised.

After all as recently as January the company said was making a "commitment to return between £33.0m and £40.0m to shareholders."

Two months later we learn it's actually going to be "up to £33.0 million to shareholders".

Now the message is we should be grateful to be getting anything at all.

Valueseeker you didn't like it when I pointed out the cashflow issues even before the raise, and tried to give me a pretty smart reply to that. You've also been making unsubstantiated claims like how this will have exponential revenue growth, and shooting down other posters who pointed out some of the glaring issues here.

Rather than now trying to present like an expert now, you should be accepting a bit of humble pie and admitting you were wrong. I hope nobody was fooled by your ramping.

@troublesome Kooba gave the name of the PR firm, look them up. Their client list reads like a who's who of some of the most well known and largest plcs. Includes multi-billion market caps like BP. Seems very flashy to me, especially in context of a micro cap like this.

For all the flashy PR it's very hard for them to gloss over how hapless Tenner is. Can only go so far when you're lumbered with him as the face of your firm.

It's a tad concerning new red flags seem to appear whenever he makes his latest pronouncement. Now claiming some shareholders didn't want any return - after the company has been dangling the carrot for over a year - stretches credibility.

Then he says: "Given we'd already made the commitment, we felt we couldn't go as far as that."

Gee thanks Brian. Clearly everyone should be grateful for this damp squib tender, and thankful they're returning to shareholders anything at all - let alone millions below guidance company itself gave.

I need to thank you for pointing out the insider selling, would have missed that. Looks terrible now seeing they were knowingly doing it ahead of this. Then trying to bury bad news dropping it after market close before Easter. Poor all round. Big relief though, might have to buy some Mara immersion fluid to celebrate.

Trev's not having a great year, what with Chamberlin, Iqai, now this looking a bit bleak. Bit of comeuppance.

Claiming 10p by summer on a share that last traded at 0.736p would represent an increase of over 1250%.

Pretty shameless ramp even by the standards of these boards.

Yes inability to sell shares while it's private is the big issue. Sometimes when delists happen the company at least allows share sales via a third party platform, but here they specifically say that "a trading facility will not be offered".

Owning shares in a private company is a very different kettle of fish from a public company, with none of the usual protections and benefits you get from owning shares in a plc that has to follow regulations and disclosure requirements.

You would be entering a wild west where, while you will still technically own those shares, you won't have any real visibility into what the company is up to. While it delists they'll be diluting rump shareholders substantially for good measure.