Member Info for Hexam

“Results were in line with expectations”

Except they weren’t were they. Just ‘broadly’ and then mentioned the hits to those expectations.

“All those desperate PRNs make sense now. Expect no more updates until next year now.”

Except this latest raise won’t last that long so the usual pump, raise and then go quiet cycle can’t wait until then so expect more of the same much sooner this time - or, who knows, maybe some good news instead!?!

Will, they need money just to keep going as they’ve run out. The £100k for BlocKeeper is just something ‘new and shiny’ to distract from that.

The problem is that the £400k left won’t keep them going very long.

Hi Stupmy - all good here, hope it is with you too and yes, it’s been a while but just couldn’t believe there were some here actually thinking these results were great!

I think the long term picture is still good but this update isn’t and so it was just a case of how much was already priced in. The early market reaction suggests not enough but at least the drop isn’t too severe.

The placing is no surprise (to most at least) but the amount perhaps is - only £500k which will only last a few months.

The optimists might say this is because significant revenue is just around the corner so they don’t need much to tide them over.

The pessimists might say that they struggled to get any placing away (even at just 0.35p) and this is all they could get for one last desperate hurrah.

Count me a pessimist.

Yes, of course airlines make their money over the peak holiday periods but the issue is the winter loss has widened and the outlook is not great.

So the price is unlikely to ‘pop’ at open - at least not in the right direction!

Hopefully just a bump in the road, but a bump nonetheless.

“Panmure Liberum; Are experts in finance,”

They are also Boo’s in-house brokers so not exactly a surprise that they are talking up, as usual, the latest BOO smokescreen.

“It’s a beat here and expect the sp once we het a decent spread to head back into the 20’s.”

Yay! They’ve beat their totally manipulable unadjusted EBITDA forecast.

How about cash flow? (still negative, so let’s just talk about some savings without updating on this)

How about GMV? (still falling so let’s just mention the fall ‘declining’ and throw in a misleading comment about ‘February exit rate’)

How about revenue? (grim, so best not mention that at all)

And profit before tax? (why mention that when we can waffle on about unadjusted EBITDA and ignore the fact we’re still losing money).

A disgrace of an update and I doubt very much we’ll hit the 20’s soon or at all this year as can’t see what the impetus could be - and the full numbers (in August?) won’t help as we’ll finally get to see what they’re hiding here.

I doubt the market will be so easily fooled by that RNS. Once again saying a lot but hiding so much.

"significantly and moving from a loss-making position in the prior year".

Oh no it didn’t. Some idiot changed the numbers but left last year’s commentary in. Yet another sloppy clanger. DBZ made a prior year profit.

Revenue up over 80% but profit up only £10m - just goes to show how hard Debs has to work to make money and how unlikely it is that it could ever carry the group on its own.

PLT meanwhile…but don’t worry, all brands are trading profitably ;-)

Will - I am sure many shareholders like yourself find my posting tiresome as you are right, the majority (I’m glad you didn’t say all) of my posts are indeed negative - just as I find those that are ALWAYS positive (or negative) tiresome. I understand and accept that.

They are negative though simply because of the trail of broken promises, changing narrative and never ending jam tomorrow - as well as my own personal doubts that it is to even possible to achieve what they claim.

Should they start reversing that trend (and the link up with the ASIC manufacturer MAY just be the beginning of that) then I will be a surprised but enthusiastic supporter.

As it is I am just looking for the next spike to exit but this proposal to remove the delisting clause has spooked me so I may not wait that long - as I don’t want to be left holding shares in an unlisted company and (this is just MY speculation) the company may be going this route due to the inability to raise funds which the accounts suggest they desperately need.

So sorry to annoy and I do try to post less now but there are some rampers with their constant lies, insults and hypocrisy that I just find hard to ignore. So perhaps it’s time for me to resurrect the green box?

“Unfortunately, he, his other IDs, and his friends are sick people with personality disorders.”

I think this just shows you up as the nasty, unpleasant person that you are (as well as deceitful and hypocritical as it was YOU who were proven to have more than one ID).

The proposed bond restructuring SHOULD be a concern to any shareholder - why try to remove the clause on delisting, why do they need to drop the conversion percentage so making it a better deal for bond holders and a worse one for shareholders and why extend at all if significant revenue is so close?

It could be nothing in particular to worry about but it is at least worth asking the question(s). Especially the one about delisting.

Both sets of figures are correct - they are just different things.

Razor - TOTAL retail sales by VOLUME

Level - ONLINE retail sales by VALUE

All nice background but the key is just how BOO have performed whatever the market background you compare it with. Maybe we will find before the end of the month as promised…or then again, maybe not…

“But others don't have "methods", as long as your new super fast brute force 2nm ASIC produces the same hash result as a BitAxe or S9 then it's working. A winning hash is not required.”

Exactly. Testing a chip or rig to make sure it has the expected hashrate is straightforward but that is not what QBT are doing - they are claiming the hashrate stays the same but it is a more selective one.

It’s like buying lottery tickets. It’s easy to have more chance of winning by simply buying more tickets (equivalent to increasing the hashrate) but QBT are claiming their tickets each have a better chance of winning than an ordinary ticket does. That’s harder to prove unless you buy shed loads of lottery tickets and compare the win rate (or, in QBT’s case, mine on an industrial scale so you can measure the difference in coins mined). So it’s not at all like the normal testing of mining chips where you are just testing the amount of oomph the chip has.

Maybe there is a way they can test it conclusively without large scale mining but I just can’t see it - if the ASIC manufacturer can though then that’s all that matters.

"Some people here are pretending to be shareholders, but as soon as you read what they're saying you realize they are 100% lying."

I presume you are not talking about me Obelix as in the past I proved my investment by the only way possible (posting my buy in advance) . Unlike you who actually proved one of your claimed investments here was fake when you posted under the wrong profile by mistake.

You make a fair point though that it doesn't matter whether I believe there is a way of demonstrating their claims it is whether the ASIC manufacturer does. I'd LIKE to understand how but I don't NEED to understand how. I was just pointing out that they cannot demonstrate by the number of coins they mine unless they do it on an industrial scale. That is a fact that any statistician worth their salt would readily confirm - so you don't have to take just my word for it.

“Read the RNS, it tells you all the information you need to know”

I did, and it did. Unlike you I applied some critical thinking too.

PS I’m already invested thanks very much.

“They could get lucky once, twice or even three times within a short period of time”

No, they couldn’t - the odds would be in the trillions of doing it three times . Even if they did it once it would just be put down to absolutely unbelievable luck - especially as they are only touting a 10% improvement.

Rather than just sling insults Clintek how about coming up with a coherent argument of why you think QBT will be successful or how they could prove their claims without mining on an industrial scale?

You seem to have only one card to play and boy do you keep playing it. Boring and predictable.

“Agreed, but they could get lucky...”

Even if they did and they beat the odds of 190,000 to 1 they would have to do it more than once (as doing it once proves nothing - just that they did indeed ‘get lucky’).

They have absolutely no hope of proving their claims by simply mining unless it is on many hundreds if not thousands of the latest rigs - only then could they hope to get a statistically significant result that would convince anybody that it wasn’t just dumb luck. It’s a non starter otherwise.

“better sell your shares.”

Could turn out to be the best advice you’ve ever given on these boards, if a little late, as it’s a shame you weren’t sending out that message when it was £3 (instead of imploring people to buy more at such a ‘bargain price’ 🤦‍♂️).