Member Info for Phimx

Dooogle:

Why is it a closed period?

Gardin has had many opportunities to buy but hasn't!

Dooogle:

You'll be buying lots then?

Sell your home and car, borrow as much as you can you'll be rich!!

Strange that Gardin isn't piling in though. He's not putting 𝗵𝗶𝘀 money where his mouth is. Gaddin is happy to take .oney out of QBT but won't put any in. Time and time we see this on AIM but the gullible ignore this huge warning sign.

PAS14: You wrote

" '.....when individuals or organisations are taking a position you won't know about it !... '

... utter rubbish , plenty of things can tell you when accumulation is taking place "

𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝘀 ?

Dooogle:

Look son, it's very simple when individuals or organisations are taking a position you won't know about it !

I suggest you look at the buying strategy of companies that have share buy back programmes, it's educational. I have only seen these programmes bought in random varying amounts. Only someone studying the statistics of volumes would suspect a big buy was in progress. No buyer with any sense is going to telegraph their intentions unless they had good reason, perhaps bizarrely they want to pay more for the shares.

To be clear, even publicly announced buy backs are well disguised.

Dooogle:

I heard all this drivel over at INSP. 9 year of discussions, testing, design for manufacture, world class product, boundless potential, RNS after RNS. Those great RNS everyone is so fond of believing. Basically years of vague ambiguous drivel. It was a perpetual development project with no technical or scientific performance figures, just hype and more hype for the gullible.

Gardin latched on to a feasible M.Sc. project but with no real commercial value after sitting on a shelf for nigh on a decade. The first QBT patent has failed but Gardin isn't telling you that little snippet. In fact he and the patent agent should have known it was destined to fail.

This is just another pie Gardin has his fingers in , big investors are well aware this a project with no prospects and I suspect the gullible here that call themselves 𝗚𝗘𝗡𝗨𝗜𝗡𝗘 investors are just desperate to get out now.

Or if you want more fanciful projects to invest in pop across to UKOG there are plenty to choose from.

Mickeydj:

Was that a cryptic clue you posted ?

So Dooogle how much did QBT finish up on Friday ?

Dooogle:

" There seems to be a few of these late reported worked buys coming through end of the day, why are they buys…

Because if they were sells we would be down, simple as that and also the price they are at suggests buys."

So Fridays's closing price of 4.23% down, reported by Google, is incorrect !!!

Dooogle: You write

"Notice imho, I can have a view without my post being deleted."

That tells us which group is removing the posts then !

Unfortunately experience has taught me what's written in a RNS cannot be relied upon. Waffle about NOMADS ensuring credibility is also to be discounted.

AIM is notorious for producing embellished and ambiguous RNS, in fact its rife and possibly the norm.

What is in a RNS is not fact!

Most of you will be familiar with UKOG or In-spirit Energy go and do your research.

A well written or should that be deceptive RNS can mean everything or nothing depending upon which camp you are in.

Dooogle: You write

"As you say ignore the trolls misinformation, they definitely have an agenda here."

Care to tell everyone what Rios said about QBT at that discussion so you can correct the so-called misinformation ?

Mrhanji: You wrote

" If anyone watched the ark invest interview with cathie woods the panel are eager to hear his views in Ai and also another area of his expertise being decentralisation"

If that's the same discussion I watched Rios did not breath a word of QBT and I think there was discussion of energy saving. It was the perfect forum. to introduce the work of QBT and he said 𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴.

Rios is there to give Gardin a cheap bit of credibility for the likes of you.

Dooogle: You write

"QBT have professionals in their field like Jose Rios and Ronald Bynoe, both staking their professional careers on little old QBT who are about to disrupt the Bitcoin industry."

It has previously pointed out that nowhere Jose Rios is promoting QBT or its methods. Someone here pointed out he hasn't claimed to be an advisor for QBT. So it would seem he's not advertising his links. When it goes its up he can claim he just provided occasional advice on the semiconductor/mining pools or made introductions. Hes not risking much, is he ?

Oldsharedog:

They are failing because they have not carried out testing in a lab. If the testing was genuine, as proclaimed in the RNS over the last couple of years, they would have found 𝗜𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 results of a 43% improvement. Gardin has claimed 30%. He has made a simple assumption that a 30% rejection rate by the Oracle gives that same improvement. At first glance an easy mistake to make and everyone made it.

So the conclusion is Gardens irrefutable figures are the result of his poor grasp of the affects an Oracle would have on the hashing results and his mathematical naivity. The results come from his pen and not good scientific testing by a world class development team.

Usersteve

"they "roll it in glitter" to make a sale"

Very apt for QBT

Hexam:

I hadn't realised I had so much talent!

Koolkat:

I guess it will be pointless to ask you to state my lies!

Irrefutablely Mickeydj should be reporting you in order to keep this board pure!

Koolkat: You write

" Phimx, this is impossible for you to deny or disprove this, as it is happening as per the recent RNS.

Why not STOP this and just stay on ADVFN?"

I think you are worried Koolkat, after all you never have anything to say worthy of discussion.

I think the irrefutable is refutable!

Gardin writes

" Following almost three years of R&D efforts, the AI team working on Method C has delivered its first irrefutable result, with a new version of Method C AI Oracle, which can now be used to mine the current blockchain blocks in real-time with an approximate 30% improved performance."

𝗶𝗳 𝟯𝟬% 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗽𝘂𝘁 𝗯𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗲 𝟰𝟯%