Member Info for Hexam

But that’s my point. I think it is a backward calculation so it isn’t 300 EH running. A random high burst of coins mined would work backwards to suggest a high EH just as a random lull in coins mined would suggest a much lower figure. The actual power could be the same in both cases.

This seems the most plausible explanation to me. Certainly more plausible than sudden 50% swings in actual global power. That would be possible if there were only a few miners but for many to shut down one moment and restart the next? Just doesn’t scan to me - unless they all shut down for big football games or something! Weather could be an explanation but the pattern just doesn’t fit this as a reason.

FP - sorry can’t agree. If it accurately represented the power of machines out then surely the spikes wouldn’t be so violent or so short-lived? I think it is more likely just down to the reason I gave i.e. random fluctuations in ‘probabilistic outcomes’ :)

AB - Didn’t someone say on here that hashrate shown is actually calculated backwards from the numbers mined - if that’s the case then given a individual block mined is down to probability and luck then that would go a long way to explaining the wild swings. Otherwise, as you say, it’s hard to explain from patterns in downtime.

In any events the swings in my view should be ignored and the averages focused upon.

One’s describing a spike, the other is showing on an average (over 7 days on the setting you have). The average (over 14 days) between difficulty changes is what counts.

No problem. The whisky sounds a good idea. It's sunny too so I really should ought go out and enjoy it rather than keep posting here.

Whisky in the garden it is then :-)

"NB 2: miners mine coins and without them there is no supply which is something to ponder"

You only need 1 miner and they will get all 900 per day. Let's hope it's ARB if it comes to that :-)

No Breacon. The future cost is an estimate. The actual cost is factual (though does depend on what you include and I've tried to be clear on this). And the only reason I quoted an exact number was in response to the exact number posted in the RNS which excluded most of the cost base and was being misinterpreted by posters.

As to hubris I am always careful to stress these are my calculations (which should always be checked) and my estimates and I don't pretend that my estimates are the only possible answer (in fact the one thing you can guarantee with any estimate is that it is wrong).

It's a fair question but I thought I was clear. Apologies if not. It depends on what is included. The $34k did not include share based payments or interest payments. The $42k does. Which is more appropriate depends a lot on what the numbers are being used for.

The $30k I've just posted is an estimate of future cost.

Here it is. These costs excluded interest. So with this my estimates is for $30k+. It is an estimate though so who knows and if you want to see AB's response and other comments then need to go back to May 21st in the chat.

"I think the all-in cost at the end of the year/phase 1 may be $25-$30k per BTC based on the following assumptions (compared to Q1):

5.5 EH is reached
Difficulty Increases by one-third
Mining efficiency per EH (before immersion) improves by 20%
Electricity cost per EH improves by a third
Immersion adds 15% to coins mined and 15% to electricity costs
Fixed Costs increase by 50% (bigger operation but growth much lower than EH increase)
Fixed Costs now include share based payments
Cost of new machines + immersion total $225m but spread over a more realistic 5 years rather than 3

The answer drops out as $25k so a cautious range might be $25-$30k especially as I've assumed 5.5 EH hit.

If difficulty does not increase (e.g. because BTC stays low) then the answer drops to under $20k.

These are just my guesses and the answer varies greatly with the assumptions - which are there to be shot at! But hope this is at least a little bit useful for anybody interested in the numbers side."

"I’m sure Hexam will soon be producing his forward looking numbers for Q3/Q4 based on expect EH increase and allowing for immersion and a reasonable factor for over clocking, for those who don’t run down the road looking over their shoulder."

I already have - and so did AB. It was an interesting exercise and though AB came up with a lower cost than me it did indicate how badly a rise in BTC is needed.

The $14.6m loss only includes direct mining costs including costs of machines (via depreciation). It doesn't include wages, interest etc.

It does though include the reduced value on HODL during the month due to BTC falling and this is the reason for the huge loss.

Without this the loss was just $100k. So in May the revenue didn't quite cover the direct costs of mining.

I also missed out the $14.6m loss in the month (before overheads). So adding now - for completeness.

"bad june could be over 50k"

Pretty fair chance it was for May actually with just 124 mined.

"this DOES NOT mean miners should turn off machines. That should only really be considered when operational, marginal costs (mostly electricity) are higher than BTC value."

Having said this the last ARB RNS said "High temperatures in Texas led to increased energy demand and higher electricity prices, to which the Company responded by voluntarily curtailing mining operations and reducing its energy usage at Helios".

I thought initially this was part of the agreement/relationship with the grid but if this was purely an economic decision this suggests a big increase in price or the marginal costs are higher than I think (i.e. it's not just electricity).

"You can not honestly think it costs 42k to mine a 30k bitcoin"

Yes - I do. Why do you think miners are suffering so much at the moment?

I laid out my full calculation before but if you want to look at ARB Q1's accounts and prove me wrong then happy to see your numbers.

Should add - as I've done before - this DOES NOT mean miners should turn off machines. That should only really be considered when operational, marginal costs (mostly electricity) are higher than BTC value. They're running at about $10k per BTC at the moment (Q1) for both ARB and CORZ so we're currently a long way from that.

I'm fine - I'm not bothered at all by any insults about me posted by strangers on a forum but thanks for the concern and the compliment.

As to the maths that just reflects my background/experience and that I try to be objective when looking at shares. Hopefully it is of interest to others just as what others post is of interest to me particularly regarding areas I'm weak on (of which there are plenty). I just use thus board as a useful exchange of ideas and views - naive of me I know but happy to be a dreamy idealist :)

Just get bored and occasionally irritated by some of the slanging matches on here. Still, it's much better than it used to be.

"Don’t think I mentioned you anywhere Hexam? Ever in fact. Have a good day."

I never said you did - again you read something that wasn't there. But as you mention it you have posted about me in the past and some pretty nasty stuff too.

Regarding CORZ v ARB I've just taken a quick look at part of the financial comparison for Q1.

I had previously estimated a $34k per BTC all in cost of mining (but excluding share based payments and interest) for ARB for Q1. I estimate the similar figure for CORZ to be $27k per BTC (with 3,202 mined in Q1) but is more approx as have had to allocate some costs between their mining and their other activities (like hosting).

However if I add in interest and share based payments the figure comes out closer at $42k for ARB and $39k for CORZ.

It is only one quarter though and this is obviously just one piece of the puzzle but on the face of it the mining efficiency (in cost terms) is broadly similar - at least according to my calcs.

One worry for me about CORZ is the amount of debt they are carrying - over $1bn on the balance sheet, most in the form of convertible notes. In fact these convertible notes were revalued at Q1 by over $350m and lead to a thumping loss for Q1. I haven't looked into the debt in more detail (all the terms, valuations etc.) but I certainly would if I was thinking of investing. There is also over a $1bn held on the balance sheet in respect of the Blockcap acquisition - again I haven't looked more into this.

As to why their mcap is so low I don't think it necessarily is compared to ARB based on current financials. Yes, they are producing 6 or 7x the mining revenue at the moment (Q1) but their debt high and their profitability is actually similar (i.e. broadly breakeven at Q1 without adjustments) - note that their other activities don't seem to add much. If BTC rises sharply then CORZ will probably benefit much more but equally it looks more vulnerable to a downturn (which has happened since Q1 as the average BTC in Q1 was around $42k and it is now $30kish).

Of course future plans are key to any valuation and so these need to be compared for ARB and CORZ (which again I haven't done yet but hopefully other can fill the gap here).

A bit rambling but hope it helps a bit for those that raised the questions?!

"So looking at the last burst of sPaGbOl Jimmy posts, the board would be better without LA, BC, AB or anyone else who rates this Company highly and believe in a strong future."

It's amazing on how you keep reading things that simply aren't there and twisting them to mean something completely different. Not a skill to boast about though.

"Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day."

True, but that particular clock has been right a lot more frequently than that. Has proven a far more reliable timepiece than the more zealot of the rampers: $100k+ BTC by Christmas (2021), £5 ARB, £10 ARB, £XXX ARB etc. etc.

I still have confidence in ARB but I'd rather read realistic posts than pie (or moon?) in the sky nonsense from rampers or the silly de-ramping without any basis from the naysayers.