Member Info for Hexam

Or as John Lennon put it...

"I am he as you are he, as you are me and we are all together"

Hopefully nobody does think I'm a walrus though - even I'm not that big. No tusks either.

Tbf Ben, Jambone was a prolific (positive) poster who was banned then came back as Parker121 - and has now just been banned again. So it is not surprising when a new poster comes on, posting a lot of (positive) posts that somebody thinks Jam may be back for yet another go. Must admit though you don't sound like him.

On the other hand Brew was another prolific poster but he was negative on QBT and has not been banned. Anybody who says anything negative on QBT is automatically assumed to be Brew. That includes me and apparently I/we also work for GSA and looking to close our short anytime soon.

If nothing else this board gets top marks for paranoia, making things up and indulging in other conspiracy theories. But then most boards seem to be like this rather than what they should be for - sharing information and debating on companies we're invested, or simply interested, in. Shame really.

But I thought I was meant to be Brew?

Now I'm really confused.

Ben,

I agree with you so I'm not sure of your point. I was just saying the spread is not quite as high as shown at the top of this page (and your numbers show that too). The spread is still much higher than more conventional stocks that are traded much more (as you would expect) but I agree with you that it is higher than it is normally is here. I just don't know why - maybe simply because volumes are even lower than normal and uncertainty even higher so MMs have no real clue where to set the price - but who knows?

Zesty,

First thing is the spread is not usually as wide as it appears. For example I just did a dummy buy and sell and they came out much closer. You can see the same if you look at the actual trades. It may be the spread gets reported as the lowest available bid among different MMs and the highest available ask? In which case a spread may just in part reflect different stances by different MMs - or of course the reported spread could just simply be as unreliable as the buy/sell indicator?

Beyond that, obviously low trading stocks and those with more uncertainty around them have wider spreads but why the spread here would be wider than it is usually I have no idea and would just be idle speculation on my part.

There you go. Genuinely good results and better ones than expected (given RYA) leads to increased sp. Very nice :-)

Haha - it doesn't matter. As I said it can work both ways and if I was responding when the situation was the other way around, and I would have, to a question as to why there weren't any buys, the rampers would be much happier. As it is...

"No surprise if MMs try to initially take EZY down like they always do with good news"

I think this is an urban myth. It only looks that way, usually for one of two reasons.

The results ARE good but not as good as what was expected hence the sp still goes down.

OR

the results are not actually that good at all but as investors we are biased and pick out the good bits and conveniently gloss over the not so good bits.

In this case though I don't think either applies and the results do seem very impressive especially when put against Ryanair (whose poor results no doubt provoked fears for EZJ's figures).

So am expecting a good bounce today - unless I'm missing something (like everybody else)!

AWL - It's more that some sells were misreported as buys. This is common (both ways so you also often get buys reported as sells too). This is simply because which way the trade is made is guessed from the price and the spread and sometimes it gets it wrong. For example if you look at the trades at 14.30 and 14.48 they have been reported as buys as the price was marginally above the mid-point of the reported spread but looking at the prices of other trades immediately around them they certainly look like sells to me.

The moral of this story is don't take what is reported as gospel (and there are other reasons too why what is reported can be misleading).

Personally I ignore the such data anyway as it is only relevant really if you're a daytrader looking for fractions of profit and where the price is going to move in the next few minutes or hours.

For QBT for example the long term price depends purely on how well or not their methods work - the rest is just short-term noise. Though plenty seem to get excited about this noise and join in the MM conspiracy theories...

“Interesting Brew and Hex seem to have left us. Hope I'm not tempting fate saying this!”

Nope. Well, Brew says he has as he posted he was fed up with impossibility of any meaningful or civilised debate but I’m still here. Just not much of interest at the moment - same old, same old as the wait for news goes on and on and…

AWL - No worries. It doesn't matter at all to me what anonymous strangers say about me on a message board that is supposedly for discussing investments.

Unfortunately though most posters seem more interested in childish squabbling which doesn't add anything to the debate which is why I've filtered those that just seem to use the site to let out their own anger and bile. So I can't see a lot of what you refer to anyway and the rest I just ignore but thanks for the concern. ATB.

It’s just my honest opinion and giving that IS normal for me. And I know that nothing I say will affect the share price anyway or QBT delivering anything. So I don’t think I’m shooting myself in the foot and besides I’m not going to lie just because I think it would be in my self-interest.

Some may be happy doing that but I’m not. Each to their own though.

I’ve explained several time Zesty. Still expect a few more pump and dumps here and I think the current price is good for that.

Plus I could be wrong and it works - in that case happy days!

“Maybe take a look in the mirror before criticising other Obelix.”

Which mirror though? His Obelix one or his MultID one? Or maybe there are others?

It’s funny how those throwing the biggest stones are the ones with the biggest houses made of glass.

I think your hopes for a civil discussions are just a pipe dream. Just like another one that I can think of…

“Where I disagree is on the pricing strategy point. I'm not entirely sure it was done to maintain or increase short term volume.”

That was BOO’s claim not mine. Think it was in one of their post results meetings last year.

I agree there is balance to be had and I'm only referring to the ONS online market stats which make undeniably bad reading.

Obviously it is possible those stats are misleading as neither they (nor any stats) can reflect perfectly BOO's actual market. Also they could outperform the market this year as much as they underperformed it last year. Furthermore the downturn could quickly reverse especially if the weather improves for a sustained period.

It is also possible that this downturn in the market is partly, if not fully reflected in BOO's own projections after all they should know the market better than we do. So they may still be on track for GMV growth and positive FCF.

In addition I agree with some of your points but not the website one (as this has been a poor lead indicator in the past) and the impact of holding prices (as that was designed to maintain/increase market share not reduce to it so they expected it to be more than offset by an uptick in volumes). We've been round the houses before on these though so no point doing so again.

The real upside though should be on costs and if they deliver on these then they could be enough to offset any revenue impact and so still see margins and profits improve.

My view on revenues alone though is that it will be grim reading but we don't have too long to find out for sure in the interims.

Shame I can’t see it then as he’s on my filter list. Sounds like he’s still contributing nothing about the company though so I’m not missing anything.

It’s ok. It’s only like children calling you names in the playground. Best, and easy, just to ignore.

Besides, I won’t be the one the in potential trouble as I’m not the one breaking any rules.

Good job I'm 'in it' then :-)

Reardon - I'm afraid it's even worse if you dig down further into the ONS figures. The online textiles, clothing and footwear sector is down over 5% in June. Looking at the first four months of the trading year for BOO, sector on line sales are down 3% compared to last year. So according to the ONS figures their market looks to have shrunk this year compared to the 12% growth last year. Given that they underperformed a growing market so badly last year with a 17% drop in revenue things could get really ugly for revenue this year with the market seemingly falling to date...