Member Info for Hexam

“Have QBT ever claimed the Methods increase hash rate? If so, by what amount?”

True for a time but if too many take it up then eventually the additional revenue starts to decrease because of the fixed number of BTC that are mined.

“Have QBT ever claimed the Methods increase hash rate? If so, by what amount?”

It does and it doesn’t. It doesn’t as it does not increase power on the network. HOWEVER the hashrate published for the network isn’t actual power but a backward calculation based on the speed at which BTC are mined.

So for example, taking a the extreme, if all machines accessed method B and it did improve the chances of mining a BTC by 2.6x then the hashrate shown would increase by 2.6x and so would the difficulty.

It’s also unclear whether the 2.6x holds anyway at current difficulty (which is higher than it was when the claim was first made and they said it was based on lower difficulty anyway).

In any event if everybody had the software then nobody would have an advantage as the number of BTC mined is fixed and difficultly would be adjusted to keep it the same.

It only has an impact if there are ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ and preferably not too many ‘haves’

“You need to rethink those numbers”

No Bob I don’t think I do. The 2.6x does decrease the more machines that are added but at only 1% it still pretty much holds (it remains over 2.5x).

And I think I should start charging you each time you regurgitate my post. Knowing how much you like to repeat posts I could probably make more money that way than I ever could on QBT :-)

“Here is a Question to Hexam, are you fully in. Or do you have a big pile of cash waiting in the side for news?”

I’m in and will probably sell on good news (i.e.a deal or confirmation of results in terms of actual mining) assuming the sp reacts as I expect. Clear enough for you?

I couldn't understand the question either Brew.

"So my Question is Hexam do you really think they will be live testing knowing this is exactly why the miners want with knowing it’s spot on"

They can't know until they've done the testing to mine actual BTC. That's the point of this testing. If it proves that the claim is correct and scalable then we'll be looking at an sp far north of 20p in my view and we'll all be happy. It's the actual results that will convince me though not your hypothesising - no matter how much you try to ram it down our throats.

I am not backpedaling at all. My view has been consistent. This is a stock with potentially huge rewards (as I’ve outlined today, yesterday and well before that).

With that though comes high risk as the claims being made by QBT are spectacular (almost unbelievably so) and we have no way of knowing what the results of the testing are to validate those claims until they are published.

In the meantime I really wish you were ‘lost for words’ and if I’m helping in achieving that then great! :-)

No closer in terms of what that answers might show - not in terms of time obviously. So in other words the risk is the same but the timescale is shorter to when we find out one way or the other.

*Sorry, obviously I meant low risk not high risk! It's impossible to be a stock with both low risk and enormous potential.

"they still mine ZCash" - yes, but in tiny amounts and it's immediately converted to BTC (which is why it's not reported separately in monthly numbers).

“So you think carrying out live testing which is what the miners want to see is risky? “

Er...no. Carrying out live testing is what obviously needs to be done. The risk is in what those results will show which is the very point Brew is making and that we are no closer to knowing. It's amazing your capacity to take what someone has written and turn it in to something they are not saying or even implying.

This is a either a very high risk stock or a stock with enormous potential. It's impossible to be both - such things don't exist.

I've said all along the rewards are enormous if the tech works so nothing has changed there. My doubts have always been about the tech working as well as they claim - and if anything those doubts have increased given the time delay and what I thought to be very unconvincing videos. I haven't suddenly gone from troll to uber ramper - just remained an investor with both hopes and doubts in varying degrees.

"The risk was 3 years ago when they started out"

Disagree - I think the risk is very much still there and to answer Brew's question yes, I think it is built into the share price - which is why the share price is so low given the potential rewards. If there was little perceived risk then the price would be 10p, 20p, 30p... who knows?

Yes Brew lots of assumptions. The most important one is how well method B works. 2.6x, not at all, somewhere in between, more?

The others are:

- nature of the deal (fee or % additional BTC mined and the level of these)

- percentage of take up

- future BTC prices

- impact of pooling

- significance of cost base

- appropriate multiple to revenue (or earnings if deduct costs)

- wider stuff like will there be any competitors to QBT in the future bettering what they offer

By giving the assumptions used (explicitly or implicitly) people can adjust if they have a different view on them or just do their own valuation from scratch (not very hard).

Just to be clear - I'm not suggesting the fair value of QBT is 20p. I'm just saying that on the assumptions I've used and stated that a 20p valuation is I think reasonable and that I believe those assumptions are conservative ASSUMING method B works as well as claimed - which is the one assumption that I think is highly questionable and the basis for most of the risk of this investment (and why it is so cheap).

Brew - I did specifically mention the halving i.e. "Even though the halving is coming up which will halve the mining numbers the value of BTC may rise enough to compensate."

Some expect BTC to go over $100k thus negating the difficulty increase from halving, others don't. Take your pick. Note this applies to difficulty increases generally as even in a normal year difficulty usually doubles (so goes up four-fold in a year with a halving) so there is an implicit assumption here that BTC price keeps pace with it which obviously may not be the case.

"Cost to mine BTC is $17,566."

No it isn't. Total cost (not just electricity etc.) is around $50k and this will be over $100k post-halving. So assuming you are talking about ARB it will be miles away from profit post-halving unless BTC soars. And no, they don't mine other coins.

Crikey, even I've picked up a stalker. Crazy board this :-)

An odd post Jambone given that my post was bemoaning both 'sides' equally and yet you only saw it as criticising your side and were indidignant it wasn't criticising the other side. But I suppose it's just a symptom of the very point I was making.

I suspect though with no actual QBT news to discuss for so long (videos recorded ages ago don't count) I suppose it's inevitable that pointless bickering, needless abuse and daft accusations fill the void.

Don't get your hopes up too high Brewhaha. I'm afraid that there are too many here that can't say a good word about QBT and too many that won't hear a bad word said against QBT. Such entrenched polarisation won't lead to any discussion at all let alone a civilised one.

You seem a decent poster with generally positive views yet you're being attacked and green-boxed. Says it all really.