Member Info for WolfofWarks

I think I’d definitely take legal advice before partaking in the governance of a company that our government has sanctioned.

My point was more around has a cost per kWh been fixed or is ARB exposed to constant hikes given its prominence in the P&L?

All this talk of 'cheaper electricity'. Does anyone know if the company has entered into any fixed pricing deals on the power. I suspect there isn't much 'cheap' electricity around at the minute and certainly none available in the short to medium term.

Btw were are Dan and Kallu these days? I see ABF wasn't as bullet proof as Kallu thought. Didn't Dan have us needing a raise by by now?

"Is a massive pent up demand for people to get out and go out to the shops.....this is blindingly obvious hence all the pandemic winners getting a kicking now....."

The only problem with this theory is there are not many shops left to buy from. If I want to go on a proper spree I have to go to the Bullring in Birmingham which is a pain in the cheeks as my local town only offers Next (which is out of town) and Superdry. If we want kids cloths my wife has to go to Primary in Banbury, otherwise it's all online.

Even when I do go to the shops I'm L or XL and 36R waist - more often than not there is no stock and I have to then go online and click and collect.

My town centre is busy but it's more restaurants, hairdressers and coffee shops rather than retail outlets.

The SP is up and down like a hooker's knickers, whether you're a bull or a bear it's hard to ever read too much into it.

What matters is the medium to long term growth and the lack of traction from the other manufacturers as they stumble towards an EV offering.

The world is Tesla's to lose in my opinion.

I've been buying Nvidia for the last month or so. Going to build up a stake slowly as I'm sure this is a bull within a bare as don't see any economic indicators that suggest inflation is going away any time soon.

The margin loan went a while back. He's got a load of investors on board instead.

He's clearly wanting people back to the office. Like any growing business though costs tend to run away with themselves and you have to sit back, take stock and trim back the overheads.

"They can amend and adjust laws and rules to suit their own agenda "

Is that not how politics works?

I think we are past the most dangerous point. This will just fizzle out now as long as Russia can be arsed with it.

I doubt the Ukranian's are paying for the weapons but it there is any evidence that they are I'm more than open to it.

I don’t think Russia would have the same transparent procurement/supply chain management that we do for Evraz to have any idea where their steel was ending up.

Any Helios consultancy fees should be capitalised as part of the construction project so should sat on the balance sheet in the acquisition cost.

Mine went in on Friday with IG

Interesting HarChris. I think the share price is where it is because it's being treated as a high growth tech stock, applies pretty much for the whole of crypto.

I stubbornly held on to mine and am well down at the moment but bought with a ten year view so not overly fussed at the moment.

I get what you are saying but this is a relatively small company so will have a small board at least for now until it reaches scale. It’s basically a couple of data centres and some employees of which I can’t remember how many there are but it’s not many.

I’d forgotten that at it’s only a main listing it doesn’t actually have to follow the governance code like a premium listing would.

"All costs have to be factored in surely? This was my problem for some time, rampers would say 50k btc Argo 40k profit. This has gone on for a while

Miners exclude many parts from the all in price, I think if this all in price was known across the mining sector they’d be a large reluctance for people to invest. The miners know this and it’s why the figure is opaque"

Calculating a break even point is forward looking and you're basing your extreme calculation on historic costs on a summary report with no line detail.

In a real world situation you would factor in the relevant costs - at the end of the day you are trying to work at at which point it's not viable to keep the machines running. Paying consultants and lawyers $Xk to list on the NASDAQ doesn't have a bearing on this decision.

"However a good chairman oversees the ceo not vice versa, unless a founder and PW isn’t. PW is inexperienced a wise chairman overseeing this all would be wise imho."

I wouldn't say the chairmen oversees the CEO, they are two high powered offices who should be working together. Yes the chairmen and NEDs should hold the CEO to account on strategy but this is more for scrutiny rather than a reporting line.

This is a really interesting debate and in my view there is no simple answer. If you are looking at it from a pure cash perspective then sales less direct costs is a decent starting point. In then get a bit woolly when you start factoring in items like depreciation, a non cash cost, when you are then calculating a accounting breakeven rather than a cash break even. I'd factor in lease commitments instead.

Looking down the trading statement I would exclude or want further information on various items like consulting/professional costs - are these in relation to listing on the Nasdaq and legal fees which are a corporate expense, which I wouldn't include, or are they for high level tech consulting and therefore should be included.

I'd also discount any one off costs or costs that are excessive or frothy and could be easily cut if break even was coming under serious threat. Companies tend to overspend when cash isn't a problem for example expanding HR to include people directors, executive coaches, etc, etc.

I would include general and administration costs although in reality these probably could be trimmed down if needed. Share based based payments presumably have at least an element of performance attached to them - again if the brown stuff hits the fan may fall away at least in part.

I would probably use the direct costs and the admin costs as a base (around $16k per btc) and build up from there.

"How long can pw act as acting/ interim chairman before corporate Governance rules are broken? Coleen Sullivan bailed quick last year, shes a heavyweight doesnt muck around.

The current set up enables if in bad hands, skullduggery to go on and barring that, this is not a good look at all.

Corporate Laws are being broken whilst fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders arent being met. Awesome !"

Corporate Governance in the UK is a code rather than a specific set of laws. Companies are expected to comply or explain otherwise. I don't think it's unreasonable for the CEO to step in as interim chairman while a replacement is being sort, in fact there's probably a decent argument to suggest they are best placed.

I think if we are going down the more US route of dual shares and founder control we'll most likely see further divergence from the current code.