Member Info for Hexam

I have a feeling from memory that they do but they have to go through the depositary bank (JP Morgan in our case?). It's only unsponsored ADRs that don't have voting rights I think. Not 100% sure on this though.

"I think the serious US investors are just as clever as the serious UK investors"

Agreed - I'm not suggesting otherwise. All I'm saying is that if things like not understanding the relative sp because of ADRs (just happens to be a US only thing but pick another example for the UK) has a material impact on the sp then the influence of fundamentals is necessarily less. Hopefully as I say fundementals always win out in the end and things like confusion overs ADRs as well as things like shorting activity, volumes, after-hour trades, MM activity etc. etc. that many seem to obsess over are, at most, just short term noise.

I know there are some people that really shouldn't be going anywhere near the stock market but would think the bulk of investors - certainly when weighted by money and especially including the institutions - have a reasonable idea of what they're doing. Put it this way - if not then how is the sp ever going to follow the fundamentals if it is only traded by idiots and gamblers - or idiot gamblers. I probably wouldn't invest at all if I genuinely thought that was the case as predicting company performance is one thing but predicting the random behaviour of people who haven't got a clue is nigh on impossible. I've got to believe fundamentals win through in the end...even if that is naive :-)

I would like to think it's not that simple and that investors aren't total idiots...???

Going the ADR route is common for UK companies listing and raising capital in the US - I can't remember the exact details but it is a lot simpler and cheaper than the alternative, full blown approach. I think it would be a lot of hassle and cost to change (and simply bringing the number of shares into line has no impact). Not convinced it would improver things anyway.

AB - I'm not sure why you think ADRs are an issue? I thought they had to issue a multiple of UK shares when listing on nasdaq in order to meet minimum sp requirements. For the same reason I don't think they can now bring them into line by simply issuing 10 shares on NASDAQ for every one currently held - or do you mean to issue 1 share in the UK for every 10 currently held?

I know there was a lot of discussion at the time about whether minimum sps did apply in ARBs case on NASDAQ but whatever the rules I can't see them doing anything that makes the sp on NASDAQ less than a dollar.

Oops - didn’t read your last post properly. Just realised you were focusing on the 39p (or 37p) part. That makes more sense now! As you say, I wish there was an edit function! 35K would still be nice though :)

That’s ok but if the sp goes anywhere near 35K on any day then I’ll be one very happy bunny :-)

I don’t think even the most ardent ramper on this board thinks that’s ever gonna happen…or do they??

“Won’t go anywhere tomorrow being a bank holiday....”

eh? What’s it being a bank holiday got to do with it?

As AB says, BTC trades round the clock so could go 35K tomorrow or 41K tomorrow or…much more likely…somewhere in between.

Not only that but I don’t think it’s a holiday in the US so ARBK will also be trading…

That positive cash flow in Q4 came off the back of US Box Office of just over $2bn or around $700m per month so if US box office does hit around $850m in May then this will certainly be enough to generate cash. It (and June) will be unlikely however to offset the shortfalls in the first 4 months which averaged only around $470m per month.

So however well concessions etc. have done it is hard to see them having enough cash (though not impossible given they already had $350m at the end of 2021) to pay down the 65% of the RCF required in order to avoid the need to get a waiver - BUT the likely big numbers for May and June plus the improving trend should hopefully mean they won't have a problem securing another waiver should they need it.

“CINE uses box office admissions in the base case likely because it is the only reliable metric that they can draw predictions from.“

No. They will have detailed data on all their income, possibly daily. They will base assumptions on this using their knowledge of their business and will have models that project income and costs under various scenarios. They won’t just look at admissions and then stick a finger in the air.

Again, no one is missing this out but many seem to be missing the point of how financial projections work and the assumptions behind them. Whatever, hopefully with the great line up of films coming up everybody will soon be able to look back agree that it was a bumper summer for cinema and CINE however you wish to measure it.

Yes, they have given some indications of what happens if they don’t hit the base case but it seems more a gradual thing ie the more they miss it the worse things are (naturally) rather than if we don’t hit it we’re screwed.

If they fall short by miles then obviously they will be screwed anyway, all I’m saying is that in my judgment they should still do well enough to show a profit this year and be on an upward trend which will hopefully be enough to keep the wolves from the door.

Of course I could be wrong but like everybody else I can only go on what I believe.

AB - I don't have a logon and accessed it ok (from the link yesterday) and very good it was too. Well worth watching as it has quite a few useful things in it that weren't in the RNS and good to see the confidence exuding from PW (and even Alex).

"the other 47% came from other things such as concessions and advertising. It is too large to just omit like that"

Who's omitting it? Funinvestor certainly isn't. All he is saying, quite reasonably, is basically that although concessions etc. are doing well CINE will have allowed for that in their base case scenario - just as they have allowed for higher admissions outside the US. The difference is that unlike overseas admissions they haven't stated what those assumptions are so we don't know. If and how much the higher spend per person, or lower costs, makes up for the lower than expected admissions in their scenario depends on how they compare with their unknown assumptions on these - which we have no way of determining.

What we also don't know is what are the implications of them not hitting the base scenario. Personally I think nothing particular hangs on this so I'm not too worried as I think it just means a slower recovery rather than crossing a certain tipping point. As long CINE sell enough tickets (and other stuff) this year to show a profit (which I think they will) and that there is a clear trend of increasing audiences (which I think there will be) then I'm happy to hold and add.

Sorry - meant to say how much comes ARB's way just depends on how much retail investors put into this fund and how our mcap moves in relation to other constituents in the fund.

For info this fund is based on an index (NYSE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index) based around mcap of various crypto stocks i.e. it is not managed actively by BlockRock and ARB's share in this fund will fluctuate broadly in line with how its mcap moves relative to the other constituents in the fund. For example at the moment it has a much lower weighting than MARA and RIOT (both over 10%) as their mcaps are much higher and has a similar weighting to CLSK.

So good news that more money is going into the crypto space but how much comes ARB's way just depends on how our sp moves. From fund prospectus:

"The Fund seeks to track the investment results of the NYSE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index (the “Underlying Index”), which is a rules based, modified float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted equity index that
measures the performance of equity securities issued by U.S. and non-U.S. companies that are involved in the
development, innovation, and utilization of blockchain and crypto technologies."

Hi Wolf,

Only had one quick look through the financials but the profit was as expected and couldn’t see any red flags. Nothing stood out for me in them apart from seeing what they prepaid to Bitmain (£41m).

The outlook is a very different story though and has been covered on this board in detail today. Short version is that they expect to increase from 1.6 EH to 5.5 EH by the end of the year with benefits from immersion on top of this. They expect to spend no more than a further £100m to achieve this and will raise the funds via debt and selling BTC - so no dilution.

If they deliver this EH and at that cost with no dilution then it will be a huge step forward and much better I think than any of us were expecting - certainly me!

Fair point HC but whatever correlation there has been in the past I think is weaker now for the reason you hinted at i.e. the industry has changed, or to put it more accurately, it has become an industry. The big miners have big plans and I can't see any of them scaling back unless BTC takes a real dive. It doesn't make sense for them to lose market share unless it becomes really uneconomic for them and at $40k levels that isn't the case. It is a race and runners don't stop for a lap or two as they would find it very hard to catch up again.

@HarChris - I don't see why hash rates won't keep going up by their normal sort of rate as I don't think margins are being squeezed that much. This would mean maybe a 50% increase by the end of the year.

On the other hand as Herdie says it doesn't allow for immersion and even though at least some others will be benefitting from this too I think this will offset a chunk of this 50% (or whatever) impact.

The other plus though is that argo's current performance for it's hash rate is very poor. I think it is mining less than 75% of what it should be for 1.6 EH (not 1.7 btw) because of some very old machines and perhaps other reasons too (moving machines around etc.) so the 163 is a false starting point. Assuming the efficiency improves as newer machines come on board (including those at part of the swap with Core) then would expect a further 20%+ uplift from this.

In short I don't think your numbers are that far off but it's all about delivery now. If they do get this right then I can't see the sp hanging around this level for long. If I'm not careful I'll turn into a ramper but certainly it looks like an exciting 6 months or so ahead!