Member Info for Hexam

@UndergroundKing

I don't know what company you are looking at but it can't be ARB.

1) They don't have great facilities. They did but they sold them (Helios) at a knock down price to Galaxy in order just to survive. They now have two small, mortgaged properties in Canada and ageing machines that they cannot afford to replace or add to.

2) They are not largely competitive. Look at their figures or any half-decent analysis of miners out there and you'll see that they are bottom of the pile for efficiency and just about every other metric

3) The rising BTC will do little to shore up their balance sheet as they have virtually no HODL, assets are less than liabilities and after halving they will need BTC well over $100k just to breakeven. So unless that happens their balance will only get worse each month. The only other way it can improve it is by more equity raises which will of course stunt any sp growth.

If you can make a coherent case, with numbers, for ARB as a business I'm all ears but plenty of posters on this board have been challenged to come with one before and none of them have - so good luck!

Dagenham - It has been a bit of a feeding frenzy with all the idiotic, gibbering gamblers turning up with their outrageous price predictions based on nothing but dollar signs in their eyes but at least the one good thing about a BTC retrace, if it happens, will be that they'll all disappear just as quickly (like last time).

"With BTC becoming increasingly difficult to mine and Argo’s balance sheet I believe there is a strong position to be held here"

What is it about their balance sheet that makes you believe that there is a strong position to be held here? I can understand wanting to hold with BTC looking so strong but their balance sheet is about as week as it gets and doesn't hold out much hope for a future much beyond the halving.

This is a terrific trading share at the moment but as a long-term investment it comes with huge flashing alarm bells.

I was thinking more Groundhog Day or A Christmas Carol. Perhaps he'll turn over a new leaf as well? Can only hope :-)

“They have very low costs as far as I can make out as they have 4 staff and few costs.”

Cash costs seem to around £100-£150k per month from the last 18 months accounts so the money should last a while unless the costs have really ramped up or there are significant one-off items of spend.

“You clearly didnt watch the animations Bob. It showed live mining and how one rig was raking in the bitcoins whilst using QBTs methods A and B and one rig was struggling because it didnt have the methods on them.”

My understanding is that animation just replicated the theoretical impact or at best a lab simulation rather than live testing. It certainly wasn’t showing actual BTC being mined as that would have taken many thousands of machines and would have surely seen an RNS by now.

I know Flutter. All I’m saying is that at the moment they are screwed and they remain screwed if BTC only doubles. If it doesn’t go up much at all then I think the end will be pretty quick.

"If the price post event is double of what it is now then it won't make the slightest difference to arb."

Arb need it to much more than double in order to prolong their life much beyond halving. $100k is not enough for them unless they can pull off a quick succession of meaningful raises.

The hope is that the price will more than double to compensate (which it almost has already over the last six months). However, decent miners currently need $40-$50k BTC to be profitable and that doubles at halving to $80-$100k - and difficulty pretty much doubles anyway every year even before halving is considered. So the big question remains whether BTC will rise more quickly than hashrate/difficulty (including halving) or will miners be chasing their tails until the weakest start to fall (which should then help stem difficulty increases for the survivors). Nobody knows - which is all part of the fun!

"As I said earlier today, keep reporting the trolls - their posts go against lse rules and will be removed."

Yours certainly go against the lse rules - but I'm not the reporting kind. Filtering is good enough instead. Bye.

"Would arb ever be the subject of a takeover?"

No.

I’m not sure if MARA will get the same bounce as CLSK. It ought to (and then some) but CLSK reporting coincided with a good upswing in BTC sentiment. Also the figure for MARA is so huge it may just be seen as an obvious ‘one-off’ even though it isn’t really with only $84m of it backdated (before Q3) - though it will be hidden a bit more if done in Q4 rather than Q1. Also CLSK was first so as you say it may be more expected/understood with MARA.

I agree it is ‘real’ profit but of course it makes the results much more volatile and MARA will see big losses if BTC retraces - much more so than under the previous rules.

As you s

"21 tick ups late on a Saturday night early Sunday on an account trolling here isn’t normal! Nobody is stupid enough to believe that! Boiler room gang involved here and it needs dealing with!"

Oh shut up. It obviously struck a chord, just not the one that you're in tune with. Read the room for goodness sake.

"From q1 I have it more than 400 million."

You may be right with BTC up another $1k since I posted!

The carrying value in the accounts I can see at Q3 was $286m with 13,716 BTC (so average carrying value of around $21k per BTC compared to the then market value of $27k each) .

With BTC now at $48k that HODL is worth 13,716 x 48k = $658m so an uplift of 658 - 286 = $372m if they change to market/fair value.

The HODL at the end of Jan was actually much higher (15,741) but the additional 2,025 will not benefit so much by the change as the BTC mined since September will have a much higher value already included in revenue - perhaps around $37k average each as it will simply be the value it was mined at which has risen sharply since last September.

So the extra 2,025 may get an uplift of around 2025 * (48 - 37) = $22m. Added to the number above still gives just under $400m but it's going to be close if BTC holds at around $48k to the end of March. (Obviously anything mined from now until then will only benefit if BTC increases further).

Hope this makes sense but whatever we each think the exact number is I think we can agree it's huge!

I'm not sure though about your comment "Unlike everybody else Mara will have a real crack at ‘operating profit’ in its next earnings" as CLSK only needs BTC around $40k to operate at a profit and I'm sure others will now be operating profitably too. At Q3 MARA's all-in operating costs were about $39k per BTC mined so maybe they will already be close in just Q4 reporting (maybe that's what you meant?) but like CLSK they will also certainly be operating profitably now.

Your reply suggests you really are T4G. Even if you are not you are starting to sound just as bad as he was.

Looks like the rampers are working overtime this weekend 😆. Has no boding on next week.

Yes, this debate is getting so silly it reminds me of trying to debate with T4G. Perhaps others are right?

As I said though, whether it is compulsory or voluntary redundancy doesn't matter. Nor does whether it is redundancy or not (only to the people involved). So believe what you like - it really doesn't matter. All I can say is that my personal experience is clearly very different to yours as in mine they haven't usually left by way of redundancy (instead resigning, 'leaving by mutual consent', fired etc. ) and if they are made redundant it has equally been voluntary or compulsory).

So I'm not sure where you have worked or why it matters to you whether they were voluntary redundancies or not but the important thing as far as BOO goes is that they have gone and costs have been reduced (though sad news of course for those losing their jobs but any pay-off would have hopefully softened the blow).

Fine - but that's not what you said to justify that view, you used an argument that was false. Obviously McCabe's departure was not redundancy (compulsory or voluntary) and I can't see anywhere that indicates the others were voluntary redundancy (as opposed to compulsory). It doesn't matter at all though whether it is voluntary or compulsory as it amounts to the same thing - and as Pokerchips says it's the profitability at the end of the day that matters and streamlining management will certainly help towards that.

Agree Pokerchips - margin/profit is everything.

*certainly not McCabe