Member Info for Hexam

“Hexam , it’s no lie , moneys as good as in the bank”

Seems like you missed this part of the PRN (unless you’re somehow privy to the workings of the Venice Court of Appeal)?

“In the event, however, that the Venice Court of Appeal does not set the hearing date to approve the settlement before its ruling on the appeal before it against the original Judgment, the preliminary agreement will be void.”

Rest assured if they provide any proof that any of their ‘products’ actually work then I’ll be saying plenty of decent words about QBT. Until then it remains a highly speculative gamble with long odds but potentially huge rewards - and that is the simple reason why I invested. That doesn’t mean I have to fall in love with the company or read things into company announcements that aren’t there (or ignore things that are). That would be just foolish.

It wasn't Brew that lied. It was PAS. No funds have been recovered yet. Even if it was true, then going on to say 'and that demonstartes further funds can / will be recovered' may not be a lie but it is certainly disingenuous. More shining examples of people making stuff up and projecting their own behaviour onto other people just because they don't share their views.

"Schoolboy stuff llewellyn."

C'mon Brew - that's being disrespectful towards schoolboys.

"0134, all you do is troll to trade. You offer nothing here"

I think you'll find that Awl was very grateful only a little earlier today for the help he received from 0134 with the question he asked so clearly that is just a silly comment. Also I'm pretty sure there isn't a barge pole that exists which is long enough for him to even consider touching this share with whatever the price.

Good to see though that the rampers have got their own bot now :-)

Perhaps - but that doesn't explain your comment.

The loss before tax was indeed £1m but only after already excluding all the exceptional items. So I don't get how you translate that into double digit profits by removing one-off costs (which have already been removed) or saying if they had not reduced debt (which does not affect profit other than actually increase it slightly because of the lower interest payable for the rest of the year).

"If they had not reduced debt or had the one off payments to Carlsberg for the Kronenberg re-branding fees, then they would have made double digit profits."

Not sure how you worked that one out? In particular how did reducing the debt adversely impact profit?

"Why not stick to discussing QBT on here and if you want to talk about GST do it on that board. Pretty sure nobody here want to read your obsessive GST posts on here."

Indeed - hence one reason for the filter button. GST may explode or implode but not interested in hearing about it either way here. I suppose the prolonged, complete lack of any news means that some feel they have to fill the void with a bit of pathetic baiting.

"Will accelerate when interest rates drop."

But not by much. Net debt is expected to fall below £1billion by 2026 which is still an eye-watering amount especially for a company not yet back to profits and only generating modest cash now (after interest). Interest payments are around £100m p.a. so even if they reduced significantly the impact from that alone wouldn't make a particularly huge difference. So long as profitability/cash generation keeps heading in the right direction though all should be OK but it is not in a great position to deal with any setbacks.

As I said, I'm happy with my investment and am confident in the share price recovery but do not expect that recovery to be very quick or without risk. I agree, I can see the share price doubling from here (and more) but I think it will take a few years to do that - and that's ok with me (though obviously would be delighted if it was sooner)!

“I don't think anyone expected it all to be paid off did they?”

No, but the reduction is painfully slow so will remain a giant millstone around the company’s neck for quite some time.

That said the company is moving in the right direction and I’m happy with my investment - just not expecting any fireworks today or any time soon.

"I’m not trolling Jambone, I actually want to see a return on my investment. I’m just concerned for your state of mind."

Indeed. I filtered him ages ago as like several posters on here he see's positive in just about everything and the negative in absolutely nothing and gets easily upset and childish whenever anybody suggests all may not be well. Whether it's blind faith, an overemotional (and/or 'overfinancial') attachment to the share or just naive stubbornness I don't know but normal investors should welcome all views especially those which challenge their own thinking.

Instead this board is just a playground with insults and stupid accusations of manipulation, multi-IDs, agendas etc. from the more fanatical posters. And none of that matters as in the end the only thing of real importance is what actual and verifiable news gets delivered and whilst we all have our own views on what that might be (and maybe strong ones too) none of us can know for certain. So we could just be silent and wait or debate like adults - or we could just keep this board looking like a reception class has been given access to the school computer. I'm not holding my breath.

“Child Ego state. If a fully grown person behaves like a child or is constantly immature, and infantile, then they have a low level of emotional intelligence and limited intelligence too.

Just for you Fleccy! Ring any bells…”

Seriously? Have you not read Obelix’s posts? Or Jambone’s? Or PAS? Or…

“Anyhow, supplied my sources, and sick of arguing it.”

Welcome to the club. No matter how much relevant knowledge you have, the logic of your argument or the quantity and quality of the evidence you can produce to support it you will never, ever get Bfd/T4G to back down. It’s just not worth trying.

…that’s as opposed to QBT that has absolutely no fundamentals - just unproven ideas, which could of course explode into an amazing business but at the moment it’s just all speculation and hype.

“Arb was just hyped at the right time. No real fundamentals behind that”

That’s absolutely not true. It was a profitable business with a very strong balance sheet and was in a great position to grow into a much bigger and much more profitable business.

Unfortunately a series of bad strategic decisions, some better ones that were just poorly timed and a crash in the price of bitcoin led it to where it is today.

You should be grateful Brew is posting as this board was pretty dead over the days recently that he and other doubters weren’t posting. Hardly any of you has anything to say about Qbt so it seems you just wait for sceptical posters to contribute so you can attack them with childish drivel or if they aren’t posting just bait them in the hope that they do.

That’s social media for you I guess. No content just juvenile bile.

Yuri - I think your numbers are iffy so no wonder you are so pessimistic. Distribution costs were only £327m for FY24 and admin (including marketing) was £372m - so both much lower than the numbers you cite and with more savings to come.

Hi Ocean,

The £100m cash outflow you asked about is described and detailed in the report.

The actual cash flow of the operations was broadly break-even. This was £130m worse than last year almost entirely due to the inventories which went down around £100m last year (as they tightened up on this) and up nearly £30m this year (to support the US DC).

So this is the main reason cash flow is so much worse than last year.

The £100m total outflow though doesn’t come from the operations (as I said l, that was breakeven) but from capex (£65m), EBT shares purchased (£15m) and net interest and lease costs (£23m) and a few other small ins and outs. In total these were broadly the same as last year - again pointing to the change in inventory as the main cause of cash deteriorating.

FY2025 will be better because of lower capex and hopefully better operating cash flow (with lower costs and better inventory) but probably not enough to give positive overall cash flow (though just the FCF bit ought to be - as they’ve said).

By the way most of the £50m cost of closure of the DC you mentioned did not impact cash. It was mostly just a write off of the assets held on the balance sheet so just hit profit not cash. The cash cost of the closure was less than £10m.

“Can't imagine it will be reported in the June final results”

I agree, not in the reported numbers but surely it would be mentioned under post balance sheets events? Mind you, as I said, it also warrants an RNS before that anyway in my view if they started to generate any revenue.

But how does that work without generating revenue? What are they testing? The only true test will be when they actually try to mine with their software otherwise how can they validate the 2.6x claim?

* acoreceived should read actually received in earlier post