Member Info for Hexam

Yes Daffy but that achievement hasn't been proven outside of QBT and clearly interest has now waned from shareholders (or they simply don't believe it after all the previous false dawns) as the price is back down to around the same 0.68p.

"Can any LTH’s come up with a civilised coherent response to usersteves question?!"

No, hence all the abuse and patronising comments instead.

In fact they rarely ever talk about QBT at all. Just what a 'sad life' the people who want to talk about QBT on a QBT forum must have. Strange.

"There are currently 3 funds with open shorts here"

Who? Name them and how much are they? Or is this just more stuff you're randomly making up just like the price you claimed ARBK closed at on nasdaq?

And how much dilution would this proposed (not guaranteed) $40m convertible loan lead to if it does convert on a company with a market cap of only around $25m? Do the maths. It does look like an effective planned takeover to me either through calling in the loan (which they can't repay) or converting it to get a majority shareholding.

“Hexam you’ll have less pain at the dentist

than here if you are short when you return

to see the share price up in next level”

Well I’ve returned and the sp is now down another 15% so far today. Not sure that’s the next level you meant? Shame I haven’t shorted as I’d be quids in if I had.

If you’re simply looking at charts and following Zac then no wonder you’re in trouble - they are both worthless here. Charts because the current state and inevitable (lack of) future of the business overrides any chart ‘signs’ and Zac because he’s been discredited on these forums even more than you have.

Having said that there is clearly scope for a bounce here on some pretext or other so all is not lost for you but I think most that visit this board are more than knowledgeable enough to understand that the long-term future of ARB for existing shareholders is somewhere between bleak and nonexistent - and the latest RNS just reinforces that.

But carry on ramping and line spacing - you might rope the odd newbie in and could still get your 10% or whatever.

Anyway, I'm off to the dentist which seems a far more enjoyable prospect than continuing to read your dross.

All we need is Sharebel to start posting and that really would be the final nail in the company's coffin!

"at these prices now with a fwd PE so low"

The PE ratio looks pretty high to me given the limited growth outlook and that I think appears to be the problem. Not sure why you think it is low? Anything above 10 is toppy for a company not growing much and this is well above that even with today's sp drop.

I’m not a short but if I was I’d be very happy with the direction the company and the sp is going.

You obviously don’t have a clue but thankfully anybody with at least half a brain does.

“It closed at 0.0445 dollars”

No it didn’t. It closed at 0.3422 dollars actually - as the Nasdaq link provided by red rag clearly shows (as does google and yahoo).

So perhaps you provide a link to the ‘right report’ that shows it closing at 0.0445?

If anybody wants a clearer indication of how broken this business is then idiots like you turning up ramping the pants off of it should be enough.

Seen you on so many boards spouting your weirdly spaced out nonsense.

“With the FPGA Bitcoins though, it will be 30% less.”

Not if they are trying to show Method C mines 30% faster. It’s a 30% power saving OR a 30% increase in mining - it’s not both at once.

Oh, so you can explain it then. I'm all ears...

I think it’s exactly what I’ve always believed it to be!

You saying that with a straight face??

“Then he says they're mining Satoshis, not bitcoins. OK, so it's comparable because they both use a blockchain, but bitcoin is where the money is right now.”

Satoshis ARE bitcoin - just very small parts of a bitcoin. Think pence and pounds except there are 100 million Satoshis to a bitcoin. So from the pool they are in they will be rewarded with tiny fractions of a bitcoin based on their contributions to that pool.

What I can’t see is how they can possibly demonstrate the benefit of Method C when their vanishingly small contribution to the pool will make no difference at all to the number of blocks actually mined by the pool?

A very straight face. Frasers have bought many millions of shares, helped stopped the outrageous bonuses and seem to have given the previously complacent management a kick up the backside to try and sort things out. All positive things. What specific things do you think they have done that have helped reduce the sp?

I can deny it - and do. He's helped shore up the share price of BOO - I don't think he has played any part in decimating it.

Maybe you should be a bit more careful in your wording then - though in any event I would argue Ashley is not that ‘involved’ in BOO. OK Frasers have bought a shed load of shares, prompted the company into facing up to its problems and taking action - and of course his pressure helped quash the ridiculous bonus proposals. All good things! But Frasers haven’t got anybody on the board (yet) so no involvement beyond their activist role.

I don’t think any of the poor sp performance can be put down to Ashley - in fact it probably would be even lower but for him.

The poor sp performance is down to Mahmud and his cronies - not Ashley or the MMs.

So I think your comments are meaningless (as always).

Really don't think THG and ASOS represent 'all e-commerce'. I believe there a few other companies out there that are trying this internet thing to sell stuff - and not all them are doing badly.

Yes Daffy except that QBT aren't entitled to all the '€6.1 million plus interest and adjustments for inflation' as 30% will once again go to the Sipiem Receiver following the voiding of the agreement:

"Consequently, the agreement with the Sipiem Receiver (”Receiver”) for the purchase of the Receiver’s right on the 30% of any sum collected (net of legal fees) is no longer legally valid, as it was conditional on Court approval of the above Settlement. Hence, the Receiver will maintain its right to 30% of the damages recovered net of all connected costs borne by CL17 for the recovery, as per the original agreement of these terms between CL17 and the Receiver in 2019."

"Recent success: In June 2024, QBT received €700,000 from the Sipiem litigation settlement. This demonstrates the company's ability to successfully pursue and recover claims."

Though that agreement over the €700,000 has since be voided and so they are back to trying to get all the money in the settlement (less the 30% which the receivers are once again entitled to following the voiding of that agreement).

My recollection is that Method B did not require any chip development but could work with any existing chip so if they were progressing this then they would be talking directly to miners and not to chip manufacturers.

So any meetings with manufacturers and any possible (but extremely unlikely) leaked email would relate to Method C or something completely different - but not to Method B.