Member Info for Hexam

“So the sudden recent big buys are just pure coincidental ridiculously bad luck/timing then??”

Or simply shorters closing as has been suggested that didn’t want to be caught in exactly this scenario and were simply reacting to the ‘leak’ in case it was true.

Wolf - agreed. I’ve also never known a case where a share is suspended and the company has not issued an RNS - even if it is just saying the reason is that ‘news in pending’ - as some have.

Even more bizarre as they did issue an RNS today but with no reference or signposting.

News pending could still mean anything but since it appears to have been initiated by the FCA, and not by ARB, it is concerning - but we can hope.

It maybe that ARB did not know until this morning and assuming PW is in the US or Canada a comment would not have been possible to draft and get approvals until much later and we may still see something today perhaps…

HC - I hope you do still pop on to the board now and again as your knowledge is extensive, your reasoning sound and, though I don’t always agree with you, our conversations are civil.

Sadly that’s not often the case with some others - and we’ve seen plenty of examples today.

Well PI I’ve been quiet as I’ve just got back from visiting a relative in a care home this afternoon if that’s ok with you. Some things are more important - but should I ask permission next time?

Well, put it is this way. If you are right then QBT would be worth an absolute fortune as a 30% uplift would give whoever uses it a near monopoly as they would win just about every race and BTC to use your Usain Bolt analogy. Unfortunately it isn’t but QBT will still give miners an advantage if the 30% becomes reality - but it is a 30% advantage - not more. And that will be valuable enough.

I don’t think I can say any more to try to convince you but I would advise researching it more yourself.

In the meantime good luck anyway.

Blubay - fair enough but I think it is still a possibility and just hope not more serious which I agree it is likely to be if it is not just a missed reporting date.

Tyke - I’m not a BTC buff so not so hot on the actual way they are awarded but my understanding is by successfully solving whatever it is they are solving they get rewarded a block (6.25 BTC I think). If they are in a pool this gets shared with others (by proportion to EH contributed or other basis).

In a sense then it is who about gets there ‘first’ but the extra speed just means more lottery tickets in effect (in being the one to ‘solve’) - not how likely it is that each individual lottery ticket will win.

Poor - I really do give up. You clearly have not comprehended again what I have said.

Suthy - yes I'm sure.

Yes, you are correct that it depends on competitors hash rate but that is all part of the same logic.

If global hashrate is 200EH and you have 20EH then you would expect to mine 10% of coins available.

If you increased to 40EH but the global hashrate was still 200EH then you'd expect to mine 20%.

Of course in this case it is more likely to be 40EH out of 220EH so a bit less than 20%. But if others are growing at the same rate it could be 40EH out of 400EH so back to 10%.

@bitcoinbull - yes efficiency does vary but this is more to do with downtime (older, less reliable machines or other reasons) and randomness, especially in some pools. If you look at the best miners though they have very similar efficiency rates and they are all close to, or at, 100% expected production (CLSK and BITF are two of these).

FFS Poor if there are no Q3 results then that absolutely breaks NASDAQ rules and that does result in suspension (both on NASDAQ and therefore on here - see number 5 on the list).

It may not be the actual reason here today but the point HC made was, and still is, correct.

*you double the hashrate and expected BTC production is proportional to hashrate and so is also doubled.

Blubay - Would agree if the suspension came from ARB but as it is from the FCA how can it be good news? It could be 'no news' but cannot see how it can be a positive.

Because hashrate is itself a speed (hashes per second). Double the speed, you double the hashrate and expected BTC production is proportional to hashrate.

If what you are saying is true then machines not at the latest spec would mine next to nothing and there would be a lot more variation in efficiency between miners - and an absolutely mad race to build the fastest machine and monopolise production.

I agree Blubay but don't you think that producing quarterly financials and then stopping is a bit of a red flag for the FCA (especially when it is requirement elsewhere where they are listed)?

We await 2.30 I suppose (even if pre-market is trading my understanding is that this not actually the 'market' if you get what I mean - could be wrong though).

@Suthy - I see what you're saying but I'm afraid in this case it doesn't work like that.

@Bitcoinbull - Pretty much spot on. I'm in ARB, not QBT, and you are right that a 60 BTC per month increase is not enough on its own to save ARB especially as 60 BTC is currently only worth about $1m not £1.2m.

In addition my understanding is that the tests show UP TO 30% as opposed to on average 30% so the extra revenue would be less in reality.

I'm not convinced ARB is the partner being spoke of here - possible, but in my view unlikely, and I hope, for the reasons you give, that it isn't. GL with your investment but I wouldn't look to ARB for good news.

“when did it get suspended?”

“Argo Blockchain PLC
The Financial Conduct Authority ("the FCA") temporarily suspends the securities set out below from the Official List effective from 09/12/2022 07:45”

tbf any of the first six could well apply here though number 3 in particular looks very plausible.

HC - but you have to ask the question why now? There must be some reason why the FCA have done this?

True John but as you suggest NASDAQ does require quarterly submissions and it is possible it could still lead to LSE suspension. If this isn’t the reason then things do look black indeed.