Member Info for Hexam

Actually Spodulike this is what annoys me most about these boards. If they are not to share information and try to help eachother what are they for? Instead they just seem a place where people invest (or more it seems, gamble) on a stock and then spend all day simply cheering it on like it's some nag they've backed in the 2.30 at Cheltenham or their favourite football team and anybody that says anything against their horse or team is the devil incarnate.

So I don't expect or want advice on for this board or expect especially deep insight even - and of course ultimately everybody should do their own research to backup anything said here but apologies for naively expecting posters to discuss in a civilised way the pros and cons of particular investments. How silly of me expecting that on an investment discussion forum...

You really think the CEO would give me answers? Really?

"How is posting from QBT PRN and interviews misinformation HeX?"

Because JonnyJambone you put you own spin on them and claim things which are either not true or at least unclear.

You also accuse posters like me of wanting to put fear into shareholders presumably to get people to sell. Not true. For all I care you can invest your house, partner, children and pets in QBT - or not - and good luck to you. It's your choice and means nothing to me.

All I care about is whether I invest in this or not but I have questions which are so far are unanswered. If Method C does work then potentially this share price could go up significantly, not to levels Method B would give but at least 10p if a chip manufacturer goes for it. That's worth investing in but to me there are too many holes in their claims and I'm just trying to fill those holes. If I can then I'll invest but it's clear that I'm unlikely to find any help/answers on this board as posters are too busy frothing at the mouth. Perhaps I should just ask QBT for a video like the FT journalist did...?

You are the one posting endless misinformation JonnyJambone - please just stop. Please.

No, I'm saying you are being misleading in saying that they can add to existing chips, instead they can change the design of existing chips to incorporate the new features - a not so subtle difference which seems entirely lost on you.

Jambone - who said anything about QBT making their own chips? That would clearly be nonsense.

Jambone, I'm no IT whizzkid but even I know you cannot mess around with existing chips and just add things to them. You redesign an existing chip to build something different and incorporate the changes that way. Once an actual chip has been produced, that's it, you can't change it.

Seriously Jambone? That's a very strange argument. I'm talking about a claim that QBT has made of doing what many people believe is impossible not of an experienced chipmaker developing another chip for the same purpose that previous chips were built for.

"If it’s proved to work then where is the risk Hex?"

That brings me back to my previous question of how can they possibly prove via a demo that it works without actually mining bitcoin (which they can't to any scale)? Nobody has yet come up with a plausible answer to that. But let's say they can 'prove' it. There are still more risks and costs developing a chip with a third party and in any event the final proof can only be achieved when they actually mine using these chips and compare to rigs without these chips.

Another question - who are the potential partners/customers apart from Bitmain? Are there that many other players out there at the moment in this space? At the very least would expect someone from Bitmain to be at next week's meeting.

You've missed my point Jambone - I'm not say chip manufactures won't keep developing chips it's whether they will see enough benefits versus the additional costs and risks to do it with QBT rather than just carry on as they are -even if they are fairly convinced by QBT's demo?

Also there seems to be a lot of talk about miners here and but at this stage they are just possible future customers of any eventual product - I don't see them being engaged very much at all at this stage beyond what they would normally be with chip manufacturers. QBT can't for example sign exclusive deals with miners as might possibly have been the case with Method B and miners don't need to sign up for anything at all at the moment.

Brew - I'm not sure what miners have do with this at this stage i.e. what they are signing up for? Surely it is the chip manufacturers QBT are targeting - and indeed they have said this themselves. The miners don't need to spend anything at this stage, they can just wait until the new chip has been developed and proven then choose to buy the new enhanced rigs if they want to - which is presumably some way off whatever happens. They could of course put pressure on chip manufacturers to engage with QBT and develop it if they are confident they will benefit in the future but I don't see them paying out any money until the product is available to everybody?

The question is whether a chip manufacturer will want to invest so heavily for a possible 30% improvement or just keep developing their own chip themselves without the additional risks and costs?

No he said the SP was at 115p when the offer was made, there was no mention of what the offer itself was for. And you accuse others of not reading posts properly?

That depends on how much the offer was for surely?

I gave a specific example of why buys can be more than sells and yet the price goes down (regardless of any comparators) and why generally you can't just look at buys and sells in isolation. Nothing to me looks suspicious but if you think it does then so be it and if you have any actual evidence then perhaps you should contact the appropriate authorities rather than argue the toss with an anonymous nobody like me on an obscure message board as that way it may actually have some impact.

I thought my post fully answered your question and why you think BOO should move in the same direction as all relevant companies (when all relevant companies have not moved in same direction anyway so that's impossible) is beyond me.

If you didn't like my answer though then I can live with that.

For starters I don't see why you think BOO should move in line each day with the stock market generally or the retail sector in particular. BOO is a single company with it's own management, performance, outlook etc. and sentiment towards it will not be exactly the same on a day to day basis as other completely different companies or even those in the retail sector (which apart from ASOS which is only up 0.2% today) are also very different. If that's your evidence then it is extremely flimsy and circumstantial evidence bordering on the non-existent.

As for there being more buys than sells this could be for any number of reasons which can each have different interpretations as regards the sp. In particular buys and sales are equal (they have to be as you can't have one without the other). However the figures you quote are between the market makes and either investors or with each other. These need not be equal in the short term as if buys do really outweigh sells it means the investors are buying more off the market makers than they are selling to them - or the other side of looking at it is that the market makers are selling more to investors than they are buying from them. To do this MMs must have excess stock so perhaps they are simply flogging this excess stock to punters and have lowered the price so they can get shot of the stock as quickly as possible because they don't want to be caught holding it?

Another possibility is that there are investors buying and selling in the background - the figures only show completed trades in the day not orders waiting to be filled.

All this assumes that buys are accurately recorded as buys and sells as sells - and one thing we do know is that this is definitely not the case as the algorithm that decides which is which is so poor. It also assumes all trades are recorded immediately - which of course they aren't.

So in short the data is very suspect but even if it was accurate it is only giving a small, snapshot of the overall picture and you need to know the rest before judging whether demand or supply is really in the ascendancy (if you do not believe as I do that the movement in sp itself generally tells you that anyway). And if you believe shares should routinely move in line together perhaps you should just stick with mutual funds?

Pretty much, yes. Any other questions?

“Still waiting for your explanation southcoast as to why, in a supply and demand driven market, the sp is down today with two thirds buys?”

At least three possible reasons that could readily explain it and I expect there are others. I’m not sure why so many people quote such numbers on these boards as they are only a small and often misleading part of the trading picture and besides they are frequently wrong (which is one of the possible explanations by the way)!

Last information was that Frasers were on 28.5% so they haven’t got that much to ‘hoover up’ anyway as doubt they will want to get to 30% and trigger a mandatory bid for the whole company.

Agree SCB/Craw - my response was to Bfd in case that wasn't clear, not to your more recent posts.

The market is basically quite simple. The price will either be dropped to try to encourage more buys or increased to try to attract more sells - in each case to balance the books and maximise the number of trades - just as with any other type of market. It's amazing that so many on these boards think that somehow this particular market place operates in the opposite way...