Member Info for Hexam

"then it is truly very odd we are being held back."

It's not odd at all because it's not true at all. Across these boards similar excuses are commonplace, made by a certain type of 'investor' every time they believe the sp of their investment is not performing as well as they think it ought to be - which is basically most of the time. 'It's being held back', 'When the MMs let this go it will fly', 'MMs playing games', 'mates rates', 'classic tree shake' etc. etc. These myths and cliches come from the sort of punter that just cannot accept that they may have made a bad choice and need somebody else to blame.

The 'truth' is much simpler than that. The price would be higher if more wanted to buy it. They don't (at the moment) so it isn't. If a good RNS lands then it will be. Even the rumour of good RNS would be enough. Without either the interest just isn't there and we're back again to single figure number of trades per hour and not much price movement.

Jambone - CLSK are one of the largest so if 20 miners took it up it wouldn't be a case of x20. Also the benefit reduces the more that take it up as the number of BTC mined in total is fixed - so if say 25% of the market used QBT the additional amount they would mine compared to now would be around 7% higher not 10%.

I can't see the take for QBT being as high as 30% either.

However, the revenues do begin to stack up for QBT without having to inflate the numbers, especially if Method B gets back closer to 160%. Even on 10% though I don't think 5 to 10p is an unreasonable sp range to hope for - and maybe much higher if sentiment outstrips what the financial justify, as often happens if this sector.

I agree that it makes much more sense to try to partner than mine themselves as to go from 100 machines to be even a relatively small player with adequate facilities/infrastructure would take an awful lot of capital.

The big IF though remains. All this is academic until they convince a potential partner their product(s) work and well enough such that they sign on the dotted line - and on that our views diverge, but in the next few months we should see which one of us is right.

Cleanspark are fairly efficient and they are mining nearly 700 BTC per month with nearly 250,000 machines.

If QBT machines were running 24/7 and their machines were at least as good as CLSK's (both unlikely) then QBT could expect to mine around 0.3 BTC a month in a pool. We know they didn't mine anything up to the end of December and at most they would have around 2 BTC from mining since but I suspect their machines have been used more for ad hoc testing then sustained mining so probably much less - especially as they would probably have to PRN if they mined more than a fraction of a BTC.

"From a cursory glance it would appear that there are more catalysts for improvement than simply a consolidation. A promise of positive FCF for one"

Well, that promise has been there for a long while, it hasn't changed, so it's not that. I do take an interest in Capita as I've been a long time invested there and there hasn't been much to write home about for ages there and still isn't.

As you say, and is my point, there is no logical reason for a consolidation to harm the sp performance - but there are logical reasons for it to improve it and that it is why companies do them (they don't do it for a laugh) but the reason why usually the sp still falls is that it is often too little, too late. It's not the consolidation that causes a problem which is why I would not be bothered by one. It MAY help the performance but it won't harm it so nothing to lose.

Obviously the mcap is what counts and a consolidation has no immediate impact on this but companies do it to make the stock more attractive so that it should benefit shareholders if only by a little rather than the Capita experience. If the sp were then to go back to 20p then the mcap being one-tenth of what it is now wouldn't be because of consolidation but the results etc. Can't see that happening anyway as the mcap would be untenable at that point i.e. something big (takeover etc.) would have happened long before the mcap fell to under £30m (and the sp to under 2p in today's money)!

"Most shares seem to fall below the consolidation price so I'm not convinced it's of much benefit tbh"

Have you seen what's happened at Capita in the last couple of months or so since consolidation at 15 to 1 - the sp has nearly doubled.

It's performance had rivalled BOO up to then in its atrociousness over several years but, without any other significant news, it has rocketed since consolidation. Made me one happy bunny anyway.

How the sp performs after consolidation is still determined a lot by how strong or weak the share is before consolidation (and how the company performs after) and they are rarely done from a position of strength so not surprised most fall but consolidation itself is done for good reason (e.g one of Capita's was making it more attractive to institutional investors). And Capita has risen despite not exactly being in a strong position so it would seem the consolidation HAS been very beneficial.

Anyway, I can't see any reason why it should in itself be a negative. Can anybody think of one?

Sounds like a good idea to me - can’t really see a downside if those chose to do this.

*Phimx

You beat me to it Phinx. It might disturb or confuse MrH to know that I'm in that list of major shareholders :-)

Thanks PAS for confirming that you didn’t understand what you were writing! 👍

That's one's gone right over my head I'm afraid PAS - I don't see the 'irony' at all. You sure you've got the right word in 'irony' and haven't confused it with 'truth'?

If I don't have shares in a company then I don't post on its board - except perhaps once in a blue moon. I think I posted just twice on QBT in all the months when I had no shares.

Either way a prediction of RKB’s has never come true so I’m not exactly holding my breath.

“Time is running out for RKB and his second week of July prediction...”

No doubt he (or others) will then claim that as the first was a Tuesday that next week is actually the second week of July…

Thanks Jambone, that reminds me of other possible questions for the AGM.

Method A has reduced from 10% to 3% and Method B from 160% to 'north of 10%' to make them more universal. Why was this not communicated in an RNS instead of an interview and why are these reductions so huge? And do they think the 160% really is still achievable in the future? And when?

My possible £1+ valuation was based on 160% improvement. With 10% that falls to under 10p. Still well worth it but again depends on deals happening. I believe Jambone that you had your own question for the AGM if we haven't seen a deal by then (or at least more news). Is that still the case?

"Hex.....day trader.....I should have guessed.....Scaring people.....to sell.....so you can profit.....What a parasite"

"Its like you are swing trading and posts to suit a position at any time, I would bet you traded very recently and looking to reload again, totally get it, done it myself trading, but to do as you are doing is very underhanded imho."

You two are something else. No, I am not a 'day-trader'. And though I do swing trade, and been very open about this, I never talk my book - as plenty have been at pains to point out I am almost always negative. If I did what you claim then I would ramp the stock to high heaven when I'm 'in'. Instead I don't and if I'm out completely then I simply don't post at all rather than knock the stock (and I would only be out completely if I though there was an imminent threat of insolvency which I don't). This was the case last year where I didn't post for months ahead of the raise.

For transparency I would currently be a buyer at 0.9p and a seller at 1.5p and I would much rather it went to 1.5p as I'd prefer to have more profit in my pocket than increasing my holding (and my average).

I agree on thing though, that people who simply talk their book as they change their position are parasites and that's one of the reasons why I counter them so much when they do appear here.

"This is because you probably invested in QBT way too early....and been burnt"

Nope Reg, I'm sitting on a healthy profit (my average is 0.75p) and have banked plenty on top of that too. I think you're confusing me with OSD as his last stated average was 1.15. My negativity is simply because I have zero faith in the company other than it keeping afloat for the foreseeable future which gives further opportunity to take advantage of the inevitable swings and roundabouts without too much risk of it going belly-up in the meantime.

If you want to talk about irony Jambone how about yours after dredging up something way back on a floated company when I though it was only now and the future that mattered? And I could find plenty of examples of you attacking other posters so you might want to climb down off that high horse of yours.

I do talk about QBT a lot but NOBODY ever responds to any question I pose to refute it or even debate it - they just abuse or deflect like you are doing now.

It appears nobody is allowed to question anything here and anybody who does is vilified or met with words to the effect of ‘trust in what our leader says’. Sound like a cult much? (Cue obvious and childish response.)

Yes Jambone, you've told us many times before but how long ago was that and what has he done to earn any credibility since with all the failed companies and broken promises?

"All that matters is that the Miners and Chip manufacturers tjat QBT are in talks with clearly like what they have seen."

They may be interested but it is only the talks that will show if they 'like' what they see enough to translate that into deals. Once again Jambone you are getting ahead of yourself.

And as you've done your 'research' perhaps you can answer my questions?

My question would be "How have you obtained 'irrefutable proof' of any of your methods working without carrying out mining at scale which seems to be the only way that would show categorically that the methods do indeed lead to more BTC being mined"?

Others would include "How does Method C earn more from a pool when it throws away the calculations that earn the reward?", "Why did you raise in January when you said in your accounts you had enough funds until at least July?", "How can Vlad be a NED AND keep his current role and stay independent?", "What happened to previous NDAs and previous commercial discussions that were expected to lead to a deal?" and many more.

Would be a waste of time asking these or any other questions though as there won't be straightforward, credible answers. Never are.