Connect with us

Ebang Hits Nasdaq IPO Running With Ambitious Expansion Plan

Ebang Hits Nasdaq IPO Running With Ambitious Expansion Plan

Published

on

Chinese mining company Ebang has yet to see a positive net income in 2020, but an IPO might give it a jumpstart.

On June 26, Chinese firm Ebang was listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the ticker EBON, becoming the second Bitcoin (BTC) mining manufacturer to go public on a United States stock exchange.

The company intends to secure up to $125 million in the offering and follow up with an ambitious enlargement — namely, it plans to open up a cryptocurrency exchange and mining farms. So, what does going public mean for the mining player, and will other crypto companies follow suit?

From telecoms equipment to Bitcoin mining

According to documents Ebang filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the company was launched by Dong Hu, its current chairman and CEO, in 2010 to sell “communications network access devices and related equipment.”

The Chinese firm entered the crypto scene in early 2014 and began selling its own brand of mining equipment in December 2016. In August 2015, Zhejiang Ebang was listed on the National Equities Exchange and Quotations, or NEEQ — a Beijing-based over-the-counter national securities trading market — but was delisted in March 2018 “in preparation for the reorganization.”

Soon after being delisted from the NEEQ, the company incorporated Ebang International Holdings Inc., its current holding company, in the Cayman Islands as an exempted firm with limited liability. Shortly after, the company attempted to go public for the first time. It filed a draft initial public offering prospectus with the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, or HKEX, but the application has since lapsed. Currently, Ebang is considered to be among the top-four largest mining equipment makers globally along with Bitmain, MicroBT and Canaan.

Revenue issues

Ebang’s revenue has been falling for the past two years, as was disclosed in the SEC filing. Figures from an earlier period were not revealed, as the firm qualifies as “an emerging growth company” as per the regulator’s guidelines and is permitted to provide audited financial statements for just two fiscal years.

However, according to previous reports based on the company’s 2018 HKEX filings — which are no longer accessible because the application has lapsed — its 2017 revenue was several times lower than the 2018 figures. Seemingly flush with success, Ebang was looking to raise as much as $1 billion at the time.

According to the latest documents, Ebang experienced a gross profit of $24.4 million in 2018 after raking up $319 million in revenue. In 2019, it earned just $109.1 million in revenue, registering a net loss of $41.1 million. Explaining the slump, the company claims to have “suffered from the significant drop in the average Bitcoin price historically,” adding that it cannot make assurances that it “will be able to gain revenue growth” or that it “will not experience another significant decline.”

Notably, the company’s revealed statistics for this year don’t suggest a huge uptick in revenue. The company registered a net loss of $2.5 million for the first quarter of 2020, blaming a “significant decrease in certain non-recurring local government’s tax rebates,” although it noted that its sales volume has increased since 2019.

Expansion plans

An Ebang representative told Cointelegraph that the company has major expansion plans, intending to fill a more unique niche within the cryptocurrency industry by continuing to manufacture Bitcoin mining equipment while also diversifying its operation by setting up a cryptocurrency trading platform and its own mining farms: “We will soon establish our own mining farms with [a] flexible cooperation model [...] as well as mining pools to sell our computing power and we will also start to set up [a] cryptocurrencies trading exchange.”

In addition, the company said it will explore how blockchain can be applied to “financial services, education and healthcare industries.” Hence, getting listed on Nasdaq is a cornerstone of Ebang’s expansion plans. According to the representative, the IPO will enhance Ebang’s brand awareness, help to attract “more talent” and help set up a crypto exchange:

“Credit is the most important point for establishing the cryptocurrencies trading exchange, and a Nasdaq listed company regulated by U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission should be able to strictly control the compliance and safety of the transaction."

Indeed, Ebang described setting up a cryptocurrency exchange “in overseas jurisdictions” in the filings it submitted to the SEC. Although the company itself is based in China, where cryptocurrency trade is prohibited, its holding company is incorporated in the Cayman Islands. Experts agree that going public might give a jolt to Ebang’s operation. Russell Cann, the chief customer success officer for blockchain and artificial intelligence startup Core Scientific, told Cointelegraph:

"Generally, an IPO can be a turning point or a new chapter for companies that experience periods of hyper growth. With the massive up-tick in activity and increasing attention and focus of institutional investors on the space, Ebang’s IPO may give it the cache to be able to not only bolster its balance sheet and enable additional growth, but enhance its talent pool; potentially increasing efficiencies in R&D, Sales & Marketing and Operations."

According to John Todaro, the director of institutional research at TradeBlock, Ebang is likely pursuing an IPO for the additional funding as well as for the purpose of “providing a liquidity event for early investors and/or founders.” Todaro noted that it seems to be an opportune moment for Ebang to go public, given that the stock market appears to be coming out of a COVID-19-induced coma in recent weeks, adding:

“IPOs are challenging in the current environment given COVID-19 as many investment banks have postponed IPOs given the anticipated weakened investor demand. With the equity markets doing surprisingly well in recent weeks, you are seeing an increase in IPOs that were initially delayed. This renewed investor enthusiasm in public markets could bode well for Ebang’s listing.”

Johnson Xu, the chief analyst at TokenInsight, suggested that raising capital seems to be Ebang’s primary focus for the IPO, although being a Nasdaq-listed company is also a key development. He told Cointelegraph: “I believe for Ebang it is a mixture of hoping to attract status and attract more funds to fund the future R&D and operations of the company,” adding that “the crypto mining ecosystem is a capital intensive industry, thus requires heavy capital investment in the very beginning.”

Ebang vs. Canaan

As noted earlier, Ebang is the second publicly traded Bitcoin mining equipment company to be listed on the U.S. stock market. In November 2019, Canaan — which is also a Chinese company — was listed on Nasdaq, raising $90 million by selling 10 million shares for $9 each.

However, its IPO was largely underwhelming. Canaan lost its biggest bank, Credit Suisse, just a week prior to the listing, raising over 75% less than the figure expected originally. Moreover, its stock has largely plunged since, as it currently trades below $2. It’s difficult to predict how the stock market will react to the new crypto mining firm, as Cann explained to Cointelegraph:

“In hindsight, some of the issues previous companies have encountered generally form excellent precedents for new entrants around what to do and what not to do. That being said, the public markets are also an efficient form of capital allocation that ensure value is appropriately distributed to the teams and projects that are growing the right way. As digital mining is still a relatively new industry we’re eager to see how the sector learns these lessons."

TradeBlock’s Todaro is more skeptical, as he doesn’t see “how Ebang would materially outperform Canaan, either in its financial results or stock price.” He elaborated that “Bitcoin mining has come under pressure since the ‘halving’ with mining revenues falling on the reduced new issuance supply.” This fact coupled with the lower electricity costs that have come about with China’s rainy season means more miners can come back online, which means that Ebang would rely on a surge in the price of Bitcoin to turn a profit.

Related: Sichuan Rainy Season to Give Bitcoin Hash Rate a Much Needed Jolt

Xu noted that the mining industry remains “opaque” in the eyes of mainstream investors, which might result in “premium valuation” at the initial stage. But once listed, “the information costs to understand the company structure and the market information asymmetric slowly get reduced, thus the premium valuation pre-IPO wouldn’t be reasonable, thus putting downward pressure on price.”

An Ebang representative told Cointelegraph that the company is fundamentally different than Canaan:

“According to public information disclosed by Canaan Inc., its key development direction is focusing on AI. Although we are peers in Bitcoin mining machine industry, Ebang focuses on the blockchain industry chain, integrating the digital economy industrial ecosystem.”

Why are Chinese crypto companies going public?

At this point, it seems like Chinese mining companies are the main crypto representatives on the stock market. Along with Canaan and Ebang, there is also Bitmain — the largest mining maker, which is currently going through a major power struggle between its two co-founders.

Bitmain has been eying an IPO since 2018 and also went through an unsuccessful attempt to get listed on the HKEX, but it could potentially enter the U.S. equity market in the near future — toward the end of 2019, the mining giant discreetly submitted a Deutsche Bank-backed application for an IPO.

It is important for Chinese mining companies to be listed in the U.S. because it represents the most liquid public stock markets, according to Todaro. However, he noted that more crypto companies — and not necessarily the mining ones — could join the IPO race in the future:

“Many crypto projects and enterprises are decentralized, which would make a public equity IPO futile and so on that side there likely will be no public equity offerings. But there are a number of centralized companies in the space that have become large enough that an IPO would make sense, such as a Coinbase, which will likely explore an IPO in the next few years.”

Indeed, on June 24, South Korean crypto exchange Bithumb reportedly tapped Samsung Securities as its underwriter to prepare for an IPO.

Xu told Cointelegraph that it is “extremely difficult” for Chinese mining companies to access fresh liquidity internally due to regulatory uncertainty, among other things. As a result, those companies are actively seeking to access capital outside of China, with the U.S. market being the main target. Moreover, getting listed on a U.S. exchange is rightly “viewed by most tech and hardware companies around the world as the pinnacle of making it,” Cann added.

Notably, the Ebang listing comes amid reports suggesting that Nasdaq is going to tighten its restrictions on IPOs to prevent smaller Chinese companies from being listed. In its latest filing with the SEC, Ebang referenced the “Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the Kennedy Bill,” which aims “to kick deceitful Chinese companies off U.S. exchanges.” The legislation was passed by the U.S. Senate on May 20.

According to Ebang, the “enactment of the Kennedy Bill or any other similar legislations or efforts to increase U.S. regulatory access to audit information could cause investor uncertainty [...] and the stock price could be materially and adversely affected.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

on

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People who recovered from COVID-19 and received a COVID-19 shot were more likely to suffer adverse reactions, researchers in Europe are reporting.

A medical worker administers a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to a patient at a vaccination center in Ancenis-Saint-Gereon, France, on Nov. 17, 2021. (Stephane Mahe//Reuters)

Participants in the study were more likely to experience an adverse reaction after vaccination regardless of the type of shot, with one exception, the researchers found.

Across all vaccine brands, people with prior COVID-19 were 2.6 times as likely after dose one to suffer an adverse reaction, according to the new study. Such people are commonly known as having a type of protection known as natural immunity after recovery.

People with previous COVID-19 were also 1.25 times as likely after dose 2 to experience an adverse reaction.

The findings held true across all vaccine types following dose one.

Of the female participants who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, for instance, 82 percent who had COVID-19 previously experienced an adverse reaction after their first dose, compared to 59 percent of females who did not have prior COVID-19.

The only exception to the trend was among males who received a second AstraZeneca dose. The percentage of males who suffered an adverse reaction was higher, 33 percent to 24 percent, among those without a COVID-19 history.

Participants who had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed with a positive test) experienced at least one adverse reaction more often after the 1st dose compared to participants who did not have prior COVID-19. This pattern was observed in both men and women and across vaccine brands,” Florence van Hunsel, an epidemiologist with the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, and her co-authors wrote.

There were only slightly higher odds of the naturally immune suffering an adverse reaction following receipt of a Pfizer or Moderna booster, the researchers also found.

The researchers performed what’s known as a cohort event monitoring study, following 29,387 participants as they received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The participants live in a European country such as Belgium, France, or Slovakia.

Overall, three-quarters of the participants reported at least one adverse reaction, although some were minor such as injection site pain.

Adverse reactions described as serious were reported by 0.24 percent of people who received a first or second dose and 0.26 percent for people who received a booster. Different examples of serious reactions were not listed in the study.

Participants were only specifically asked to record a range of minor adverse reactions (ADRs). They could provide details of other reactions in free text form.

“The unsolicited events were manually assessed and coded, and the seriousness was classified based on international criteria,” researchers said.

The free text answers were not provided by researchers in the paper.

The authors note, ‘In this manuscript, the focus was not on serious ADRs and adverse events of special interest.’” Yet, in their highlights section they state, “The percentage of serious ADRs in the study is low for 1st and 2nd vaccination and booster.”

Dr. Joel Wallskog, co-chair of the group React19, which advocates for people who were injured by vaccines, told The Epoch Times: “It is intellectually dishonest to set out to study minor adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination then make conclusions about the frequency of serious adverse events. They also fail to provide the free text data.” He added that the paper showed “yet another study that is in my opinion, deficient by design.”

Ms. Hunsel did not respond to a request for comment.

She and other researchers listed limitations in the paper, including how they did not provide data broken down by country.

The paper was published by the journal Vaccine on March 6.

The study was funded by the European Medicines Agency and the Dutch government.

No authors declared conflicts of interest.

Some previous papers have also found that people with prior COVID-19 infection had more adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including a 2021 paper from French researchers. A U.S. study identified prior COVID-19 as a predictor of the severity of side effects.

Some other studies have determined COVID-19 vaccines confer little or no benefit to people with a history of infection, including those who had received a primary series.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still recommends people who recovered from COVID-19 receive a COVID-19 vaccine, although a number of other health authorities have stopped recommending the shot for people who have prior COVID-19.

Another New Study

In another new paper, South Korean researchers outlined how they found people were more likely to report certain adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination than after receipt of another vaccine.

The reporting of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, or pericarditis, a related condition, was nearly 20 times as high among children as the reporting odds following receipt of all other vaccines, the researchers found.

The reporting odds were also much higher for multisystem inflammatory syndrome or Kawasaki disease among adolescent COVID-19 recipients.

Researchers analyzed reports made to VigiBase, which is run by the World Health Organization.

Based on our results, close monitoring for these rare but serious inflammatory reactions after COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents until definitive causal relationship can be established,” the researchers wrote.

The study was published by the Journal of Korean Medical Science in its March edition.

Limitations include VigiBase receiving reports of problems, with some reports going unconfirmed.

Funding came from the South Korean government. One author reported receiving grants from pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/15/2024 - 05:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Key shipping company files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The Illinois-based general freight trucking company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to reorganize.

Published

on

The U.S. trucking industry has had a difficult beginning of the year for 2024 with several logistics companies filing for bankruptcy to seek either a Chapter 7 liquidation or Chapter 11 reorganization.

The Covid-19 pandemic caused a lot of supply chain issues for logistics companies and also created a shortage of truck drivers as many left the business for other occupations. Shipping companies, in the meantime, have had extreme difficulty recruiting new drivers for thousands of unfilled jobs.

Related: Tesla rival’s filing reveals Chapter 11 bankruptcy is possible

Freight forwarder company Boateng Logistics joined a growing list of shipping companies that permanently shuttered their businesses as the firm on Feb. 22 filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy with plans to liquidate.

The Carlsbad, Calif., logistics company filed its petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California listing assets up to $50,000 and and $1 million to $10 million in liabilities. Court papers said it owed millions of dollars in liabilities to trucking, logistics and factoring companies. The company filed bankruptcy before any creditors could take legal action.

Lawsuits force companies to liquidate in bankruptcy

Lawsuits, however, can force companies to file bankruptcy, which was the case for J.J. & Sons Logistics of Clint, Texas, which on Jan. 22 filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. The company filed bankruptcy four days before the scheduled start of a trial for a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a former company truck driver who had died from drowning in 2016.

California-based logistics company Wise Choice Trans Corp. shut down operations and filed for Chapter 7 liquidation on Jan. 4 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California, listing $1 million to $10 million in assets and liabilities.

The Hayward, Calif., third-party logistics company, founded in 2009, provided final mile, less-than-truckload and full truckload services, as well as warehouse and fulfillment services in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The Chapter 7 filing also implemented an automatic stay against all legal proceedings, as the company listed its involvement in four legal actions that were ongoing or concluded. Court papers reportedly did not list amounts for damages.

In some cases, debtors don't have to take a drastic action, such as a liquidation, and can instead file a Chapter 11 reorganization.

Truck shipping products.

Shutterstock

Nationwide Cargo seeks to reorganize its business

Nationwide Cargo Inc., a general freight trucking company that also hauls fresh produce and meat, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois with plans to reorganize its business.

The East Dundee, Ill., shipping company listed $1 million to $10 million in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities in its petition and said funds will not be available to pay unsecured creditors. The company operates with 183 trucks and 171 drivers, FreightWaves reported.

Nationwide Cargo's three largest secured creditors in the petition were Equify Financial LLC (owed about $3.5 million,) Commercial Credit Group (owed about $1.8 million) and Continental Bank NA (owed about $676,000.)

The shipping company reported gross revenue of about $34 million in 2022 and about $40 million in 2023.  From Jan. 1 until its petition date, the company generated $9.3 million in gross revenue.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Key shipping company files Chapter 11 bankruptcy

The Illinois-based general freight trucking company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to reorganize.

Published

on

The U.S. trucking industry has had a difficult beginning of the year for 2024 with several logistics companies filing for bankruptcy to seek either a Chapter 7 liquidation or Chapter 11 reorganization.

The Covid-19 pandemic caused a lot of supply chain issues for logistics companies and also created a shortage of truck drivers as many left the business for other occupations. Shipping companies, in the meantime, have had extreme difficulty recruiting new drivers for thousands of unfilled jobs.

Related: Tesla rival’s filing reveals Chapter 11 bankruptcy is possible

Freight forwarder company Boateng Logistics joined a growing list of shipping companies that permanently shuttered their businesses as the firm on Feb. 22 filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy with plans to liquidate.

The Carlsbad, Calif., logistics company filed its petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California listing assets up to $50,000 and and $1 million to $10 million in liabilities. Court papers said it owed millions of dollars in liabilities to trucking, logistics and factoring companies. The company filed bankruptcy before any creditors could take legal action.

Lawsuits force companies to liquidate in bankruptcy

Lawsuits, however, can force companies to file bankruptcy, which was the case for J.J. & Sons Logistics of Clint, Texas, which on Jan. 22 filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. The company filed bankruptcy four days before the scheduled start of a trial for a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a former company truck driver who had died from drowning in 2016.

California-based logistics company Wise Choice Trans Corp. shut down operations and filed for Chapter 7 liquidation on Jan. 4 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California, listing $1 million to $10 million in assets and liabilities.

The Hayward, Calif., third-party logistics company, founded in 2009, provided final mile, less-than-truckload and full truckload services, as well as warehouse and fulfillment services in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The Chapter 7 filing also implemented an automatic stay against all legal proceedings, as the company listed its involvement in four legal actions that were ongoing or concluded. Court papers reportedly did not list amounts for damages.

In some cases, debtors don't have to take a drastic action, such as a liquidation, and can instead file a Chapter 11 reorganization.

Truck shipping products.

Shutterstock

Nationwide Cargo seeks to reorganize its business

Nationwide Cargo Inc., a general freight trucking company that also hauls fresh produce and meat, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois with plans to reorganize its business.

The East Dundee, Ill., shipping company listed $1 million to $10 million in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities in its petition and said funds will not be available to pay unsecured creditors. The company operates with 183 trucks and 171 drivers, FreightWaves reported.

Nationwide Cargo's three largest secured creditors in the petition were Equify Financial LLC (owed about $3.5 million,) Commercial Credit Group (owed about $1.8 million) and Continental Bank NA (owed about $676,000.)

The shipping company reported gross revenue of about $34 million in 2022 and about $40 million in 2023.  From Jan. 1 until its petition date, the company generated $9.3 million in gross revenue.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending