Member Info for Hexam

Get any more what? Machines? We can (and are, both those to replace those that were cancelled and probably the odd old Chinese rig too in the meantime).

Anyway your point was about the cost of machines (already answered) not their availability (just answered).

"And what about the depreciation in hardware new machines are needed every 2-3years which is very expensive some of ours must be close to being turned off soon"

Well, new machines will have their costs spread over 3 years and machines over 3 years old (or switched off if earlier) will no longer have any costs coming through. Current such costs of ALL machines in production is less than £1m pm and already included in the forward PE ratios quoted today. Plus all machines installed up to Feb 2021 have ROI over 100% so have already paid for themselves.

So "what about" = "no big deal"

Yes, sorry HarChris - I hadn't seen your latest post as was writing, slowly :-)

In any event I was just trying to dispel the 269 figure as it is a favourite trick of trolls to use to use 'facts' in such a misleading way that they stop becoming them.

Agree HarChris but the key purpose was to call out the paid de-ramper who quoted 269 as the P/E ratio and claim this pointed to ARB being overvalued. On a backward looking basis this may be the right figure but of course is highly misleading for a company growing fast and just beginning to make profit (just as it is for the many companies currently making a loss because of the pandemic and so have a negative ratio)!

The P/E estimate you give of 16 looks about right but considering it is for a growing company with Texas expansion coming up, whose revenues are also about to increase by over 30% because of reduced mining difficulties and despite the current depressed value of BTC, then a P/E ratio of 16 represents excellent value to me.

Great post cred2 though no great surprises. Confirms best approach to trolls:

If you can hit them with a fact or question that they can’t come back on and so shuts them up then great. If not then best to just ignore, however tempting, as attention is what they want and an endless thread where they just get insults and smug comments is their idea of heaven as it disrupts the board and they can take the moral high ground.

Unfortunately some can’t resist and fall into their trap and that’s when this board gets really unreadable. Though as the article suggests those that engage like this could be outraged genuine investors or paid themselves to play the ‘good guy’. Hard to tell.

It is a not a ‘think of a number’ thing just maths and an understanding how mining works. So yes, 240 is very possible but not 300 (unless new rigs have come on line) nor 178 (unless they have several power cuts).

No worries K3. Btw did you notice on that link you gave that they are still predicting another sizeable drop in difficulty at the weekend so more good news (and reckon this could mean we mine above the 220-240 range for July that you quoted). We’ll see but really looking forward to that RNS!

Hi K3, I’m not sure what the calculation should be but can the answer really be 95,000 BTC pm? The total BTC mined in a month is only around 27,000.

I think the problem may be that the power you’re starting with is per BTC transaction rather then BTC mined which is only after many transaction verifications? Hopefully someone with more knowledge than me can clarify.

Sharebel - Agree. The increase in shares is totally insignificant and not really worth mentioning let alone the scary headline but as I said perhaps they have little choice around the wording.

As it is the RNS is positive and another one of the benefits is that it expands the team in terms of breadth and depth of knowledge. One thing that has worried me a little at times is how small the core team is and hence the dependency on just a few key individuals and the risks that this comes with. So I think this also helps build a bit more resilience.

The difference is simply the 71,046 mentioned in the RNS. The 2m share options are exactly that, options, so don’t affect the number of shares (yet).

As dilutions go insignificant and hardly justifies the name. Surprised though “enlarged share capital” was in the headline as that implied something far worse and perhaps could have been phrased less alarmingly - but maybe wording is prescribed.

Hi ratherbelucky,

This may help (from the last report and accounts):

"The group carried out two fund raises in January and March 2021. These generated £49m in new equity for investment in mining rigs, the West Texas development, and blockchain/fintech ventures including a significant holding in Pluto Digital Assets PLC."

The Pluto investment was £7m. Working capital is low (less than £2m per month) so looks to be quite a bit left over (though they also bought 172 BTC in Jan).

"Regardless too many loans hence nearly 2/3 off our market cap in Feb/March."

We have £14m of loan outstanding so how has that translated to 2/3 (£750m) off our mcap. Interesting maths.

Rather think the fall in BTC has a bit more to do with the reduction in mcap.

ratherbelucky - agreed but, as you say, that is a facility and as far as I know it hasn't been drawn upon so is not a loan (yet). Or do you think it has? I thought the share raises (£49m) in Q1 were sufficient to pay for Texas (and some other things like Pluto investment).

*a further 9% reduction in difficulty

Interestingly the latest estimate (at least from the site below) is that the there will be a further 9% reduction on the 18th July as the average block time is still above 10 minutes despite the recent sharp fall in difficulty. So still think 240 is a reasonable estimate for July and anything much below that is very conservative. Of course it is still an estimate and other factors than just difficulty can affect production.

https://www.coinwarz.com/mining/bitcoin/difficulty-chart#:~:text=Current%20Bitcoin%20Difficulty%20Target%2023%2C581%2C981%2C443%2C664.00%20Bitcoin%20Difficulty%20Algorithm%3A,average%20data%20points%20in%20the%20Bitcoin%20difficulty%20graph.

"the fact that Pw has no problem taking out constant loans" - false information.

Only one loan I can see (the recent £14m 6-month loan backed by BTC). Also have a leasing arranging for the machines installed earlier this year which could perhaps be described as loan. So could stretch to two but hardly 'constant'. Happy to be proved wrong though if anybody else knows of any other meaningful loans or debt that the company has.

Sorry Blubay but don't quite agree with your numbers.

Agree the difficulty has dropped by 27.94%. This means though we should mine 1/(1-.2794) more coins i.e. 1.387 times more (if something is half as hard it becomes twice as easy etc.) - unless I'm really misunderstanding something.

167 x 1.387 x 31/30 = 239

Also the 27.94% is not a drop compared to the whole of June but the second half of June plus at the moment it looks like there may be a further drop in July. So I think 216 is very conservative - assuming everything else is equal. So things look even better :)

Cheers 600, and agree facts and good information can end up being buried in the rubble on this board (and most LSE boards really). Enthusiasm is great, as is expressing doubt, but the outright ramping and de-ramping are tiresome - especially when accompanied by personal abuse. Still, that's par for the course on such forums so no point crying over it.

As to your comment on people selling up I'm sorry I misinterpreted it but it did come across a bit like a command to do one or the other. Apologies.

Good post 600 and agree it isn’t ramping - just a projection of the mining numbers based on the drop in difficulty and how it all works.

If anything 220 is conservative (as 40% on top of 167 gives over 230 plus an extra day in July gives around 240). So anything under 220 will be a disappointment in my view.

What this does to the share price though is less predictable so uplifts can’t be guaranteed. What BTC does is even more unpredictable and that’s where most of the ramping (and deramping) seems to be directed on this BB and I find best just to ignore.

What is clearer though is if BTC goes up (or even holds) then the increase in mining, fuelled even more by Texas etc., will mean revenues and profits will continue to rise significantly. This should have big, positive impact on sp and is why I am invested and waiting patiently but nothing is guaranteed and I am aware of the risks (mainly BTC value).

One thing I do agree with Kevin on is that nobody has the right to tell people what to do with their money. So DYOR, read this board and take in or ignore what’s on it and make your own mind up. And good luck with whatever you decide!

Monk - I agree some of the communication could have been better - particularly around Nasdaq. I just think Argo are victims of setting such high standards. When anybody does anything well then more, and perhaps too much, is then expected of them.

I was just making the point that maybe we should be grateful for the communication levels and content we have and, though not perfect, at least it is much better than shareholders in other companies typically have to put up with.