Member Info for Hexam

Haha - thanks Bonkers, and yes the board is 'challenging' at times. There is still a bunch of decent people posting here though, with good insight and tolerance, and thankfully far fewer trolls than there used to be. Unfortunately there are now plenty of crazy rampers around too - though we didn't used to be short of those either (who could forget latpulldown who would never hear a bad word against CINE and kept encouraging us all to go to our local CINE and eat tons of popcorn - until he suddenly said he (and his family by his command) was boycotting them!

At least the extreme rampers then had a bit more clue whereas now it is more the sort who are just bottom feeders flitting from distressed share to distressed share with little knowledge of the company, its finances or the industry in general and who specialise in half-truths or outright lies (at least Magmanus is busy elsewhere now though).

I just try to be objective as I simply think that's the best way to look at investments. If others don't like that then so be it, I'm more interested if someone challenges what I actually say and with a good reason as I'd rather be proved wrong and gain a better understanding than thought to be right when I'm not.

Btw maid, I think you missed a 'Z'.

I think $5k for 2-3 years may leave even the best struggling. That takes us past the next halving and means total industry revenue (I think) of just $800m or so a year - so a maximum average of $200m each for 4 miners. In reality it would be much less than this but maybe that would still be enough?

Also though, at these levels, would anybody be able to make machines cheap enough to be able to make a decent profit? Would ATMs be able to attract enough money? Suddenly HUT8's HODL policy will look misguided (it's their main attraction - it's certainly not their efficiency). Will the sp hold up even if the financials do look ok?

I do think we are agreeing, it is just that every model has a breaking point - we just maybe disagree on where exactly that breaking point might be.

Anyway, I think we are almost talking in the abstract now and indulging a bit in flights of fancy.

Bottom line is that 4 miners at least look in a strong position to ride out any 'reasonable' storm barring major unforeseen events that either hit them individually or collectively.

I think we're actually agreeing - at least in the short term as the next halving could shift the goalposts considerably depending on what BTC price does or doesn't do.

I agree the dynamics of price and difficulty should provide a decent cushion for the better miners but when I said 'collapse' I didn't mean just falling to $10k!

I agree, I'm not worried much about Hut8 or CLSK, and RIOT and BITF would be the next two on my list if I was thinking about more.

As you say, new entrants are a risk - especially picking over the carcasses of the first fallers.

Main concern is if the 'band' snaps because of (or helps lead to) a full on BTC collapse. I'm not idealogically wedded to crypto nor a prophet of its doom. It could go either way as far as I'm concerned but I think it only needs a modest BTC recovery for the stronger miners to flourish. Still, I'm not betting the farm on it.

Oddly, at the moment the next reset is expected to increase difficulty by over 7%. I know we are less than 20% through the latest cycle but it's strange nonetheless and makes it hard to predict anything with confidence. It just feels like the whole mining industry is an elastic band being stretched increasingly and we're just waiting for it to snap.

In the meantime I'm sticking with Hut8 and CLSK to be among the survivors - to go with my longshot ARB who are drifting somewhat further in the betting...

Cheers James, appreciated.

CINE have just made their fourth request for lease rejections for "unprofitable, underperforming, or otherwise undesirable theater locations".

The previous three have resulted in 28 lease rejections and they are now seeking a further 23 which would then in total be equivalent to about 10% of their US sites.

They expect the latest bunch of rejections (if all granted) to save around $15m p.a.

Relatively small in the scheme of things but it all helps and good to see them getting their house more in order for whatever comes next.

But surely if there was positive news on the way then there would be an update - albeit possibly delayed to coincide with the good news? I thought the question was whether there would be an update at all though rather than just delayed?

I would say probably as it would surely tank the sp if we don't. The only reason I can think they wouldn't is if there is going to be an announcement very shortly that would tank the price anyway i.e. saying that the game is basically up but personally I don't think they are quite at that stage yet.

"I just thought as it shows it at 6.5p it couldn't be both a buy/sell at that price"

Easiest way to think about it is if between us we agreed a price to trade with eachother, say 6.5p, and I agree to buy £70k of shares off you at that price. So I'm buying and you're selling. Is it a buy or a sell? It's obviously both at the same time and at the same price. There is no 'bid' or 'ask' just an agreed, single price between us.

You could argue that all trades are two-way but normally it's between the market maker and the market. If we do our buying and selling above but in the normal way, then I'd be buying from an MM and being charged the ask price and you'd be selling to the MM at the bid. They would then show up as two different trades, one buy and one sell at slightly different prices but roughly cancelling eachother out.

Good news from the UT is that the auction between the MMs etc. (rather than between PIs like us) settled at such a high price (which is why presumably it showed as a 'buy' whereas if they had settled on say 6p it would have shown as a sell). In both cases though the same two-way transaction between MMs in terms of number of shares would have taken place.

HC - the £69k trade is just that, a trade, as it is the UT so neither a buy nor a sell (or rather both strictly).

Chae - as I think these are in etfs or similar it is not the asset managers that are on the hook for losses but the PIs that invest in these funds - it’s just the performance of the fund that suffers for the manager so they might attract less PI money.

If you knew it was in $ why did you claim it was 5.5p when it was 5.5c?

No wonder he was effing and blinding.

Indeed HC. The price is holding up well all things considered and if the lack of news continues then a rational me would probably sell (if the price continues to hold) and maybe I should have done so already. But as any experienced gambler/investor knows the theory is easy, the practice is much harder and it is especially hard to walk away and cut your losses. I did that with half my ARB holding when I got that out at 8p but it's really difficult to let all of it go. Call it greed, call it FOMO but selling at a loss is always the hardest thing to do (for me anyway) and I should have applied the value logic much earlier when I first had real doubts (when the sp was about £1 I think)!

Poor - You're exactly like me if your investment is based on probability.

I think it will probably (>50%) go bankrupt within 6 months but I think if it doesn't by somehow getting funding then I think it will go up sharply and by much more than 6p.

Like all gambling the golden rule is not backing what you think is going to happen but backing what you think represents value. Just like Cameroon against Brazil. I didn't think Cameroon would win but I thought their chances were better than the 15/2 being offered so I had a small wager. In effect I have a small wager on ARB for exactly the same reason.

"I would be very careful of HC's analysis of ARB, he has an agenda and he quotes wrong figures constantly"

I would challenge that as I've not seen much amiss with anything HC has posted. On the other hand posting the total asset and total liability position is very misleading when talking about bankruptcy. What really matters is whether it is running out of cash - which it most certainly is. If it can raise more cash from those assets, or off the back of them, then all well and good but they are clearly having a lot of trouble doing that at the moment.

"ARB are miles from bankruptcy"

I think you meant 'months' not 'miles'.

Yep - 5 weeks later than last year and counting...

HC - that’s total liabilities, not just ‘debt’. Loans and borrowings were lower but not by that much - at around $130-$140m.

“Hexam surprised you never call wolf out who just lies to back up what hes saying”

That’s because in my view he doesn’t. There are several that do that on this board but he’s not one of them. Instead it’s the more extreme rampers that tend do this and we’ve had another prime example of that today of one saying a deal has definitely be done already. That’s just made up BS but of course gets lots of upticks because it’s positive BS.

I don’t always agree with Wolf and think he emphasises the negative aspects more than I feel is justified but generally I feel most of what he says makes sense and is backed up by fact and a good understanding of financials.

Sadly though these boards seem much more interested in lapping up cheerleading nonsense.

That said the LTHs here (cruis, bonkers, mountainous, Huss, patience, wellington, funinvestor etc.) know the score a lot better and are much more realistic. CINE are in a hole and still a long way from getting out of it - but they might and in a way that still sees the sp rise very nicely from here. I can understand why some get irritated by Wolf though who constantly reminds us of the hole that we’re in - even if it usually only to counter the garbage that some others post.