Guys chill you both are saying the same thing in two different ways. STACH clearly referred to the tender pipe line which obviously means POTENTIAL future contacts. Which reflects the strong future of SHFT. TS - you obviously don't write with a malicious intent and you are heavily invested and an asset to the BB, but sometimes people reading some of ure posts may Mis-read them and perceive them to be a touch harsh/offensive ... But obviously you are just stating facts
Management continues to actively pursue a number of new tenders with geographic and commodity diversity, now showing an approximate 10% growth of outstanding tenders or price submissions rising to GBP1.1 billion from GBP1.0 billion at 31 December 2011, including the award of the HZL contract. The Company believes it is well placed to secure a number of these tenders.
Yes all great news and exactly as I said - they believe they are well placed to secure "a number" of the tenders. that's nothing like saying they are confident of having all of them under their belt.
My response was respectful and humorous and I don't know what you're getting so uppety about. Your post needed correcting which is all I did. I don' t think I put words into your mouth. I am English and I'm quite sure you can tell that from the way I write, so trying to infer that I might not be is a bit silly. They do not have £1.1 bln contracts under their belt and I would be very interested to see where they have ever stated that they are confident of turning the entire tender pipeline into contracts. Your sentence was grammatically flawed and implied, to me at least, that they "have" the contracts by virtue of your use of the word "have". You didn't mention that they are currently only tenders. If you meant that they are confident that they "will get" all £1.1 billion tenders as contracts that was not clear. But again I would be interested to know where they have ever stated that. The way that tender pipelines usually work is that they are ideally maintained at several times the order book as only a certain percentage of tenders are expected to turn into orders. If SHFT maintain their tender pipeline around the £1 bln mark and convert 30 to 40% of their tenders to orders then their orderbook should stay around the £300 to £400 million mark. And I didn't call you a dreamer I said "dream on" which is a common phrase meaning it would be nice if what you said was correct but unfortunately its not.
Please do not put your words into my mouth.I cite again what I said: "Therfore they are confident to have £1.1bn of contracts under they belt".If you are not British you might have misunderstood it,however if you are,please read my posts more carefully.Being confident to have some is different to already having it.Also calling me a "dreamer" is a little disrespectful.Stach.
You said they had £1.1 billion of contracts under their belt. I was just correcting that as its incorrect. Its not a case of doubting or believing they will all become contracts - its just a case of correcting the facts. But, for the record, no company would assume it would win all of its tenders, and no investor should assume that. In fact if they all came in I'd wonder how they would service them all. As long as their order book is strong that's the important thing. The large tender pipeline is good because it gives a good chance of maintaining the order book as the orders are completed.
You are incorrect,read half-yearly report,all is expressed in GBP(£).I cite "order book GBP 347.9mln" ; "Strong and diversified pipeline of over GBP1.1bn"(Tenders).Are you doubting that they are not going to to get it?Listen to his video interview.The Tenders rns is referring to are above the current Order Books.This is why I have made a point re such a small market cap and SHFT being so undervalued.Stach.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.