Member Info for Hexam

Is this the same Zak that got 4p so wrong recently? Thing with chartists is that they are always wrong until they are right (and then don’t let you forget it).

Charts are questionable at the best of times but with QBT they are particularly useless. It’s all about the news - hopefully next week.

You almost had me there Brew until the last bit about trades exceeding posts. Will never happen…Jam will see to that.

And it would be good Zesty if you posted something anywhere near the truth about me rather than just go on another moronic, ramping rant. I don't spend all my time on here (didn't post at all yesterday and less than 100 posts here in total the last month), I don't troll (saying negative things is not the same as trolling) and as for adding something positive one of my posts was deemed so positive that the arch ramper Jambone has re-posted it over a dozen times!

If you don't like what I say there is a filter button but if you are so confident in your investment then why do you care what I or anybody else says anyway? Just wait for the good news to arrive and when it does be smug and gloat over all of us that have had serious doubts.

I stand by the view that it is stupid to email a company expecting anything at all significant in reply that might be considered market sensitive information as that is a clear breach of rules. It's just basic stuff and shows a shocking ignorance to suppose that they might. If you disagree with that then perhaps say why and debate it rather than just get all sensitive and throw a hissy fit.

That’s just stupid. If I email the company and ask them if the tech really works as well as they claim they are not going to say ‘no, sorry, it doesn’t after all’ or ‘yes, all the tests are complete and confirm our original findings’.

The only way we will find anything really meaningful is from a PRN/RNS not by ringing a helpline. Businesses don’t release market sensitive information to individuals just because they ask - not if they don’t want the FCA or whoever on their back anyway.

Doesn't exactly scream 'world-class' though does it - especially the 'PhD student' bit? Also no names so no way of seeing what their credentials really are. Like all their communications - full of hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims lacking any kind of evidence.

No, it's not.

"If the directors at Argo thought they were going bust they wouldn't have sold an asset to pay down debt, they would have kept their salaries going longer."

That doesn't make any sense, not least because selling an asset to pay debt does keep the company, and their salaries, going longer.

I agree HC, they have done a fantastic job with what they inherited and have stabilised the company as much as possible - it's just, as you suggest, still not enough.

The point is Jam that whether they are 'experts' or 'scientists' to describe them all as 'world-class' is clearly nonsense so to me it provides doubts as to the validity of all his other claims.

That's because it's not 'big' news. $0.7m off annual costs is insignificant and whilst debt has come down, net assets are unchanged and debt is still way too high at $55m. It just reiterates that there is no immediate prospect of any growth as anything that is not needed to keep the lights on is going towards reducing debt.

To be fair misterb most of us knew the numbers were going to be poor - it's not too hard to work out. I just get annoyed by those who pop on to the site spouting crazy numbers and when it's explained logically to them why they are being optimistic still claim to be right or just get 'shirty'. Just ramping at its worst - unjustified numbers to rope in the unsuspecting and every bit as bad as unjustified negative numbers from trolls to try and scare people off.

*coming down

Why would I be cross misterb? The actual mining figure for Feb of 92 was affected by 11% from outage but otherwise in line with my prediction (and that of some others). Just hope those making out it would be something like 130 to 140 BTC are feeling suitably embarrassed now. They just wouldn't be told!

Really scraping the barrel also on asset sales but at least the debt has been coming come down.

I think that shows more than anything not to take what FG says too literally. I doubt very much that ANY company has 20 'world-class' experts working for them let alone a small company on aim. Unless of course you take an extremely liberal view of what 'world-class' actually means. They may have 20 very good or even excellent people working for them (obviously not full-time) but over 20 of the very, very best in the world in their respective fields? Clearly not and I'm surprised nobody suggested he ought to tone down the description for an RNS/PRN.

This sort of over-the-top language doesn't do the company's credibility any good in my view - nor that of the people who believe it.

Mystic - How do you think they can mine more in February than they did in January? Average network difficulty is up about 9%, transaction fees are down again and they had two days less mining. What do you think they have improved so much in February to swim against the tide enough to more than offset all this? It's certainly not more machines!

“My predications approx 140 BTC mined and $7.4million revenue.”

Absolutely no chance. They won’t increase on January with difficulty up, transaction fees down and two fewer days to mine.

Around 100 mined and $5m revenue, maybe a bit more or less depending on how much downtime there was compared to the previous month.

About 100.

"If taken at face value it will be 2.6x for the first miner to sign up. Then, for each subsequent miner, this will drop for all miners using the QBT software. If all miners sign up the advantage will be cancelled out."

Exactly Brew (though even the first miner won't be quite 2.6x).

"So a miner looking at this would know they will only benefit from being the 1 and only miner to take it?"

No Aim - they would just benefit by less every time another miner takes it up.

Sorry - I think you’re simply wrong. If what you say is true then there is no point in what they are doing at all. Yes, I did invest on that basis and am happy with that part - not so happy now though on the chances of them actually increasing that probability (and hence the revenue). I thought it was a long shot before but would now be extremely, but very pleasantly, surprised if they have pulled it off.

“Hexam, it increases the probability, it isn't going to double anyone's revenues.”

Increasing the probability increases the revenue by the same proportion. If all your machines had double the chance of finding coins than they did before then your revenue would likely double as well (assuming BTC value stays the same) as you’re expected to ‘find’ twice as many. Exactly the same as if you double your hashrate normally by buying new machines as all that is doing is (nearly) doubling your probability too. In both cases you are effectively just buying more tickets in the same lottery which has 144 prizes a day.

Really don’t see why this is so difficult to understand.