Member Info for Hexam

I thought they worked as consultants? In which case they will either be in the professional fees or the R&D costs - both of which are fairly chunky.

I'm not sure that makes a difference as would expect only the commission to be reported within Debenhams with BOOHOO's own brands being reported in the normal way (minus also the share to Debs)?

In any event even if what you say applies the 10% is still correct for the purely market place element of Debenhams.

From the latest accounts. They don't give separate figures for Debenhams but they do give total GMV figures so you can derive the figures for Debenhams (as that's the only company that reports on a commission basis and so has a different GMV to revenue is it not)?

"FG holds up a board and proudly proclaims it has 3tTH/s of power."

All a bit Blue Peterish.

I notice he did not mention that they were not saying they were not expecting revenues this year.

Yes, I know growth in 2022/23 was 50% or so - I am referring to growth in the last year which was about 10% - not growth two years ago. So I'll repeat the question - would you think another 10% (like last year) would be good enough or do you think they should be doing better?

"How much relevance is Debenhams ??"

In 2022/23 Debs made up 5% of revenue AND 5% of gross profit (so its margins then were in line with the rest of the business on average). So not particularly significant but its volumes grew about 10% last year (margin unknown) and may grow further this year so its relative importance is growing. Can't see it getting to £120m revenue though.

Where does it say sales were up 50% last year? Happy to be proved wrong but this is not a number I recognise - or are you referring to 2022 to 2023 and not to 2023 to 24?

Obviously mcap would be very high if revenue was £120m and profit £10m (up to £200m perhaps?) but again I don't know where you are getting these numbers from - both look very optimistic to me.

So what would be a good performance for H1 Deb sales in your eyes given this 'fantastic opportunity'

Better growth than last year (10%)?

Similar growth?

Or some growth but not necessarily as high as last year?

Not appropriate/willing to say?

Personally I would see a slight uptick on last year's growth as a good result (so perhaps 10-15% growth) and anything over 20% would be excellent but maybe I'm being too optimistic/unrealistic? Or maybe too pessimistic?

AWL - I wouldn't want to try to influence you either way as that should be just your decision based on what information is out there (hopefully what you research yourself and not what anybody says on this board).

Personally I haven't sold but then my reasons for investing were somewhat different to yours and the RNS, as bad as I think it is, was not a great shock so didn't really change things for me (apart from the sp)! Also my investment is small enough not to get too concerned about. There is usually some time between updates so every chance this will wobble up and down before then but the big short term risk is a placing (which different posters clearly have different views on and again is obviously something you have to make your own mind up on).

Good luck though with whatever way you decide to play it.

AWL - they haven't nailed down their porting issue they've just given up on one approach and are now trying another that they hope will be better. Whether this 'work around' is successful is another matter

They have not reported about revenue not happening this year but it is clear (to me anyway) that it won't be. There just isn't the time left in the year given where they are now even assuming that one of the methods does work.

They appear to be 'accelerating' to a point that many on here thought they were already at some time ago.

For reference these are the year on year growth figures for online textile and clothing sales according to the ONS i.e. what I consider to be BOO's sector. To me they clearly show a stalling, and actually worse than that as the sales have gone from growth YoY to (in the last six months) decline YoY. People may interpret them differently but that's my take and of course BOO may be outperforming the sector now.

YoY growth to:

Jul 23 +16.6%

Aug +19.5%

Sep +12.0%

Oct +14.3%

Nov +11.6%

Dec +8.8%

Jan 24 -3.4%

Feb -3.1%

March -0.7%

April -4.1%

May -0.3%

June -5.6%

No I wouldn't. You're twisting. Again. Like we did last summer.

The ONS figures suggest to me the sector is stalling. Some will obviously be doing better, some worse and the results clearly showed BOO were in the latter as far as last year goes (when the sector was rising) but we just don't know since February how well (or not) they have done compared to the sector in general.

Because I look at actual sales not the percentage of total sales (which is also influenced by how well high street sales are doing or not) - though even on that graph it looks like that statistic is trending fairly flat over the last year or so.

"Guys really, do we have to bicker like children on here?"

Fully agree Reardon. I try to stay out of it but it can be difficult!

The rumours around financing, the stalling of growth in online sales from the ONS stats and even the latest webstats are suggestive that performance isn't great BUT it is only suggestive. It really needs to come from an RNS and they may be doing OK or even better than OK (and than expected). They are silent though at the moment which is perhaps another bad sign as like most companies they tend to be quick to update on any positives but not so much when the news is not as good. They appear to be in bunker mode (though that could also be a sign of big things happening behind the scenes that could help the sp e.g. takeover manoeuvrings).

Only a month or so to find out though via the interims but I'm afraid in the meantime expect much more bickering and endless, repetitive discussions about Shein.

"They claimed back in March that they were 'performing intensive live mining tests 24/7 using ASIC-based Bitcoin mining devices connected to two large mining pools'."

I've come to the conclusion that they simply use terms which mean different things to them than they do to other people.

So when they say are performing live testing connected to two large mining pools this doesn't mean they are actually mining bitcoin via large mining pools with their software. There are other examples of phrases which have double meanings even where it should be clear cut what that meaning is.

I don't think they are necessarily being disingenuous, I think they may actually believe what they are saying but just expressing it poorly hence all the confusion and apparent contradictions.

Bottom line though is that this latest RNS shows they are not nearly as far along as past updates appear to have suggested.

No doubt there will be a video out soon to muddy the waters even further!

Maverick - that article may be AI generated as Brew suggests or it may be from QBT itself. In any event it is from a share-tipping service not 'the press' and bears little relation to the RNS which does not have any progress in it compared to previous RNS and demonstrations aren't 'planned' - they are just something they say they will do "as soon as any one of the Methods is available for real-time mining". So nothing is in the diary and they don't know when it will be. So it's an aim not a plan.

"He could very easily put investors at ease by announcing how many Bitcoin(sats) have been mined during live testing"

But they are not live testing. Not in that sense anyway.

"Francesco mentioned that they would have to inform the market the moment they know that revenue generation is not expected to happen this year"

When did he say this?

It should be painfully obvious now that they will not be generating revenue this year. They are not anywhere close to having a deal. They haven't even showed them any demonstrations - "these discussions have now reached a level where the Company is looking to provide live mining test demonstrations, as soon as any one of the Methods is available for real-time mining". So the methods are not available for real-time mining but worse it seems this doesn't even mean live mining at all, just another simulation, so even this testing won't produce any actual bitcoin!

It seems impossible they can move from where they are now to producing revenue in less than five months.

This is a far cry from the repeated claims on this board that 'deals are imminent' and that they are already mining in a large mining pool. They are clearly not and are some way off these things happening.

How much clearer can it be?

Taffy - it is your statement that is misleading. They didn't say that had enough funds for twelve months, they only BELIEVED that they did but it was tight and there was material uncertainty they did had enough.

Also the legal fees have not ceased (they are still engaging lawyers to deal with it all) and even if you remove all the legal costs the cash would not last 12 months with the rest of the run rate.