Member Info for Hexam

Thanks FP - that's really interesting, and surprising. With some methods then luck is removed altogether as the pool simply pays out on what is expected to be mined rather than what is actually mined (and the pool operator takes the risk). Must admit I thought all pools based payouts on the actual BTC it mined but apparently not.

What all the methods do appear to have in common though is that the rewards are split (effectively) in proportion to what each miner contributes - in other words the share of the payout depends on the split of 'power' provided by each participant but the total payout itself depends on the pool method (expected vs actual and whether transaction fees are included). At least that's how I read it.

Thanks. I just thought that the bigger the pool the closer you got (percentage wise) to what you expect to get. Smaller miners/pools would be subject to more variation - smaller 'sample size' and all that.

"A bigger pool might do different share outs thought."

I thought they shared out based on participants' relative EH contribution? Not sure of the benefit of pools if they don't.

FP - I think it is more accurate to say the more hash you have then the less you need to rely on luck (especially if you're part of an even larger pool).

Haven't accessed the full article (one more thing to sign up for) but ARB's monthly operating cash flow is certainly not $4m at the moment (in May its operational cash flow i.e. before interest and capex was probably around $1m and that was with BTC at $31k average for the month). With BTC now at around $20k I can't believe many miners are cash flow positive at the moment on their operations and even less so after allowing for interest payments.

So not sure how useful the article is if it is not using the latest BTC price (even though the graph claims it is). I don't think it is allowing for all monthly running costs either - just hosting and electricity.

I’m not sure ARB is in a stronger position fundamentally at the moment. The levels of debt it has taken on and the sharp fall in value recently of much of the assets backing those debts (BTC and mining rigs) puts it in a pretty precarious position at the moment - especially as it not generating surplus cash currently.

If it survives this AND delivers close to what is expected of Helios then things should start looking up for the company and it’s sp - so long as BTC behaves and starts increasing in value.

To me the current debt position + cash squeeze and the execution risk are as serious threats as BTC price risk is at the moment.

Don’t think you can blame anybody for being ‘skittish’ on an any share that has lost 90% of its value in a year or so. Skittish is being relatively phlegmatic all things considered!

If ARB gets Texas right I can see a good recovery in the sp but I honestly can’t see it getting anywhere near to its ATH as for me the numbers just don’t add up for that unless BTC goes absolutely beserk.

As I’m not relying on BTC to do that I’ll just keep believing that Helios will deliver and that the sp at least reflects that come the end of the year and I have the opportunity to get out at a decent profit.

If it doesn’t deliver, or BTC stumbles further, then I lose as I think there will be no recovery from there but that’s a risk at the moment I’m prepared to take.

In the meantime there will hopefully be good opportunities to trade too to help reduce my current losses.

HC - Interesting analysis. I think one of the things making any interpretation of sp difficult though is that ARB is basically owned by PIs rather than institutions (even the largest shareholding BLOK is really PI money, and not even money investing specifically in ARB but in crypto generally with ARB being just a small % of that fund).

I doubt many PIs are equating falls in BTC too closely with profitability - but rather sp is being driven more by a looser sentiment (with BTC price still playing a big part in that sentiment). For ARB that sentiment may also, as you suggest, include the belief it will become one of the most efficient miners and if Texas delivers in the way it ought to then I am one of those - it is an 'if' though and Helios is clearly off to a rocky start.

In my view it does still need a recovery of BTC though as even if Helios is executed well I believe the all in costs are still likely to be at least $30k per BTC mined (it's hard to say as depends on many moving parts but it is a lot higher than this at moment if including interest and because ARB mining figures have deteriorated further since Q1).

All very intriguing and it will be particularly interesting to see if ARB's sp moves differently to other miners as Helios does progress and its relative benefits hopefully emerge.

I might consider a dabble at 3p.

The bubonic plague will once again sweep across Europe, the radiation fallout from WWIII will mean everybody will sprout wings so there will be less need for aeroplanes and BoJo will do the honourable thing and resign.

OK, the last of those is a bit far-fetched but the writing's on the wall. The holiday bubble will burst and TUI will go the same way as tulip growers in the 1600s - their name's even in the flower! Couldn't be more obvious...

"double it"

Think it's rather more than that as less than 20% of May's production would have been at Texas (0.3H and 25% of swapped machines for around half a month).

As you say though we should know a lot more in the coming weeks and months and hopefully May was just a freakish outlier. They really do need to sort out their coins mined per EH one way or another though and that problem was around long before May.

Surely it is the percentage of whatever was mined in Texas not the total?? All the mining outside Texas was unaffected by the powering down.

If it was just 5% of the production at Texas that was affected I wouldn't be nearly as concerned.

Powering down only cost 5 BTC because so little of the mining is so far in Texas. Scale that up for when they have 5.5 EH and what will the impact be then?

It's all very well having access to abundant cheap power but in May it clearly wasn't abundant or cheap. One of the major plus points of Texas was the access to cheap electricity but if this is negated by having to power down so much then that selling point disappears.

In many ways it is more worrying that it was voluntary rather than forced (which I'm sure Ercot could do).

If the RNS is similar for June then that would be deeply troubling.

Yes, the Texas development and build out was always going to encounter teething problems but the issues last month went much further than that i.e. voluntarily turning off power because of the heat and problems with Terrapool. Plus the mining numbers were already very poor even before last month's issues.

With the machines expected to be added in June they should have over 1% of the global hashrate so ought to be mining close to 300 BTC, if not more. Instead I'll be happy with anything over 200 which, although still well short of where they should be, would at least be a lot better than May.

So is Whopa’s history. One has no grasp of subtlety the other has no grasp of mathematics.

Is there a full moon tonight or something?

The (roughly) fortnightly change in difficulty has just occurred and it is a modest drop of just over 2%. So not a big impact yet due to miners shutting down so it looks like they are trying to hang on despite the low BTC eroding most/all of their profits with some likely to be negative on a cash basis too (i.e. spending more in fiat cash than the value of coins mined). Having said that the difficulty had been expected to go up and so the global hash rate is decreasing a bit faster than the drop in difficulty suggests.

Average difficulty for the month is also down around 2% - but there is also one fewer day.

Given recent problems/figures, but on the other hand also not knowing how many machines they've added (or how much advantage taken of immersion), it would be a fool to guess the mining number for June. It should be somewhere between 100 and 300 but I wouldn't even be sure of that!

Personally I'm looking for something well over 200 but more realistically expect some of the problems that hit May to have affected June too. So 200 may be a bit of a stretch. Either way, will be interesting to see the numbers and the comments they come up with (including their HODL and so roughly how many they have sold during the month).

https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin/difficulty-chart

I didn’t say press releases weren’t factually accurately. Most articles by ‘shorters’ are too. It’s all about how the story is presented - one positively the other negatively.

Anyway, you’re entitled to believe what you want and to complain as much as you want just as when you do I’m entitled to interpret it as just sour grapes.

Every press release by every company is spun positively for starters. If you want to keep playing what you think is such a loaded game then so be it - it beats me though why you should as I would simply not play and choose a different game.

The last thing I would do is play what I thought was a fixed game and then complain it was fixed when I lost.

Each to his or her own though.

And what are longs who place misleading articles to try and boost a share price and spread endless ramping nonsense?

Just two sides in the same game - not a loaded one. If I believed it was so loaded I simply wouldn’t play and would be a fool if I did.

Why are institutions 'scum' for shorting? They are only taking the opposite view of a long and besides many institutions will probably be shorting simply to hedge other, long positions. Who wins out in the end will be driven by how well the company does or doesn't do not by the short term activities of the 'goodies' or the 'baddies'.

Also why is trading 600k in 15 minutes towards the end of day a reason to 'laugh'? Most trading takes place at the beginning and end of a day. Nothing surprising in that.

I'm long on BOO and disappointed in the price but no one is to blame for that apart from me for getting it wrong (so far).

They are far from being saints but constantly bemoaning shorters, MMs or whoever just comes across as being a bad loser as well displaying some ignorance as to what they actually do (including what a UT actually is which seems to be a regular source of misinformation on here).