Member Info for Hexam

You were clearly querying it as you queried where he was getting the number from before talking about EBITDA margin for some reason and this not suggesting anything near £100m.

The loss on the US DC was £100m just as SCB described and now you have the detail so hopefully that’s all cleared up for you now.

Here are the exceptional costs exactly as listed in the interims results and they come to just over £100m.

USA warehouse closure - stock provision. = 5.7m

USA warehouse ROU asset impairment = 64.5m

USA warehouse fixtures & fittings impairment = 28.8m

USA warehouse closure expenditure - operating costs = 1.3m

USA warehouse closure expenditure - administrative costs = 0.6m

Really not sure why you are querying this.

Around £100m - and it already has (in the interim results).

I don’t think the loss will be quite as high as £300m but it could come close if they decide to really kitchen sink these results and yes, the hit from the US debacle was about £100m.

As I said, I’m not sure there is any regulatory problem holding the AGM after Aug 31 for Ashley to weigh in on.

It is delayed though (like the results) so maybe he’ll kick up a fuss about this (though he hasn’t so far on the results, publicly anyway, as far as I’m aware).

Kach, my point is that as an AIM company they may not be missing any deadline if they didn’t hold an AGM by the end of August. Put it this way, plenty of AIM companies fail to hold an AGM within six months of year end and face no ramifications.

I don’t think that rule applies to AIM companies, who often report very close to the six month deadline then hold the AGM after that (so more than six months after the end of their financial year). Of course BOO could still do everything by Aug 31 but I think only the results need to be out by then to avoid suspension.

Yes, not a big issue but unlike you I didn’t turn it into a misleading ramp.

No worries AWL. That last paragraph could also perhaps be extended to MrH who seems to think they are cleaning up errors - they are not, just moving things around. He also thinks they are getting their books in orders as institutions would expect this if they are to invest.

Breaking news - their books should ALWAYS be ‘in order’. That’s actually a basic legal requirement - true and fair accounts at all times. If he thinks they haven’t been true and fair he should maybe point that out to the regulators.

AWL - The write-off is of an inter-company loan so doesn’t really have any impact of finances so nothing to worry about (as several of us had already pointed out before RKB came late to the party with his meandering mutterings).

It’s like lending yourself £100 and then deciding not to pay yourself back. What matters is whether you actually spent that £100. I don’t know how much, if any, of the 50m QBT have spent/lost but this will all be in the past anyway so is history.

What is important is what happens now and going forward and this internal loan write-off has no impact on that.

Best just to ignore RKB’s rambling musings and unfailingly inaccurate predictions.

QANTAS has posted the same facile, rampy message on several boards. Best ignored especially as the shorts and so called ‘trolls’ have called it right here so far (and on most other AIM shares).

It’s the moronic ramping that is so widespread on these boards that readers ought to be more wary of.

Ultimately though the key is not to be swayed by anything but your own judgment.

“So this leaves me wondering if FG is holding back information on the basis that a small spike may start a mass exodus of investors selling once they are in the blue.”

I think that’s rather wishful thinking I’m afraid AWL. The things you describe are tangible, verifiable information and as such would be beyond anything QBT has shown to the market so far and so likely to cause more than a ‘small spike’. There is no way they could hold back on a deal being signed for example as under AIM rules they’d have to disclose in a timely fashion such market sensitive information.

The same applies to the testing process although if it is still work in progress they will have more latitude and this may also be covered within the NDA until it is complete. So this could be kept under wraps for one reason or another but if the testing is complete and the proven, verifiable results known to all parties it is difficult to see this being kept quiet for the same reasons as actual deals.

Intothedeep - There WAS a loan but it was an intercompany one so they were in effect lending to themselves. So the second part of your statement stands i.e. no real impact to QBT and therefore nothing to get too excited about either way.

“Kk, li would have thought that if discussions had ended it would be a market sensitive point?”

None of the previous ‘discussions’ that ended (including those under NDA) resulted in a market notification so I wouldn’t expect a PRN telling us anything if these went the same way.

“3% it will still mean £3m in saving if you are mining 1000BTC and would be a game changer to any mid to small miners ?”

No, in no way is it a ‘game changer’. It is a modest improvement in profitability (if it works) no more than that. Silly hyperbole.

Idiographic nature?

I’m not sure why that is so bad but anyways I note you didn’t answer the question of why you flip-flopped and did the opposite of what you said you were going to do. Still, doesn’t matter as I expect you will flip-flop again soon anyway and no doubt in the meantime we’ll just have to endure your self-important posts and telling people how they should lead their lives so that they are not sad ones. Oh, and how successful you are and how wonderful life in Greece is.

997 free posts left before I don’t have to pay for them 🙂

You do know that the posts are free anyway?

I’m not the one who starts a post ‘[my] weekend message’ and then proceeds to post utter twaddle.

It’s odd you talk about success when you’re sitting on a quoted average of 1.15 (versus my 0.75 plus banked profits). Also you say you embrace the ups and downs but you said you would sell if there was no news ahead of the AGM and yet here you still are.

If it’s all the same to you I’ll stick to what I’m doing rather than take advice from a flip-flopping failure.

And the most pompous post of the year award goes to…

"There was times when everyone invested there hard earnt in a CO make it there business to put a suit go to the AGM once a year to meet & great the board they are invested in"

That simply isn't true (another poster that just likes to make silly things up).

Nor is the idea that you go and find out the truth if you do attend, at least not anything of significance that would not have already been made public. They simply can't give out market sensitive information to a particular subgroup of shareholders. The best you can hope for is some clarity on a particularly point that has already been shared with shareholders. Having said that a little clarity with QBT would be very welcome!