Member Info for BearleyCalls

I watched the last judgement that also went in HARLs favour. It was in fact very interesting and i was impressed how the judge went through every point of the appeal separately and dismissed them one by one. I wish i had bought more whilst the judgement was handed down. Looking back it was obvious from the judges tone, what the judgement was going to be. Other more knowledgeable investors got in quickly before the final judgement and the SP rocketed 30%. I will attempt not to make the same mistake again.

Morning to all genuine HARL shareholders on what is going to be a very interesting day. A successful result in the court will be wonderful news for HARL. I received my Sightlink link on Friday from the court and will attempt to keep those who cant attend "In the Know".

The company has secured several high-value contracts, including those for the refit of the SeaRose FPSO and involvement in offshore wind projects. These contracts provide a stable revenue base and demonstrate client trust in their capabilities​ going forward.

2. Harland & Wolff has been actively expanding its capabilities through strategic acquisitions, such as the purchase of the Appledore Shipyard. This expansion increases their geographical reach and operational capacity​ .This puts HARL in prime position to take advantage of the upcoming Green Energy Boom.

As usual The Minister of Misery's post is non sensical. Is he saying that the post about HARL producing Free cash flow was posted in error. What was the error ? .As we all know , he didnt understand what Free Cash flow was and mixed it up with sufficient liquidity" or "adequate liquidity." Liquidity refers to the ability of a company to meet its short-term obligations. the embarrassment is not the original mistake, but the lack of morals character that meant he couldn't admit to it. How embarrassing. Hallelujah.

Fake Lawyer, you keep mentioning the IM enablers, however you cant even tell us what the Enablers are to cancel one of our own posts, as you claimed had been done. Once again, please explain how someone can delete their own posts , after being posted. You continually amuse by not being able to answer simple questions regarding your own statements. One starts to realise that its not JW that told porkies, but you. So, tell us the process to delete your own posts please. ZZZZZ.

Levi, i dont usually do requests, however the thought of you screaming all alone in you universal credit paid flat, makes me want to help you out. You clearly have not been successful in life ( it happens) and could not even scrape together enough to make a meaningful investment " Yes, a holder (low four figures, does that disqualify my opinion?). My following 8 reasons may help you to for once make a successful investment decision.

Harland & Wolff has the potential to achieve significant growth and reach a £500 million turnover, get into the FTSE 250, and be valued at over £1 billion for several compelling reasons:

1.Harland & Wolff boasts some of the largest dry docks and fabrication facilities in its multi site UK portfolio, enabling them to undertake large-scale projects across multiple sectors, including maritime, offshore wind, Cruise and defence​. Thats very important.

Kaeren, you dont have an average after you sold out. Heb missed out on a 300% rise. Ohh dear, ohh dear.

Heb, is 13.35 more than 18 ? Ohh dear.

I agree Kaeren , sell it for £100m. Its got to be worth a lot more than Declan Rice (:.

Ohh Dear Ohh dear Cant even read his old posts

20 Jun 2022 12:40

I wonder as well BP?

Sold all my shares (again), definitely won't be back for any more, no smoke without fire in this company, lurches from one calamity to another without any thought for the poor shareholder.

Understand if you hold shares for sentimental reasons (which I did, living near to Arnish) it's not an investable company at the moment. AIM shares are a gamble, we all know that, but HARL is just flogging a dead horse, there are much better run and profitable AIM companies to invest in.

Goodbye (and good luck - you will need it). Price 13.335p. Im assuming that his brain is too addled to know the truth

You are not a loyal shareholder, you a re a bitter ex shareholder, that not only bought at the wrong time, but made the double mistake of selling at the worse time possible. Grow up and grow a pair, you are the only one to blame. Meantime the Loyal shareholders will reap the benefits and you will lose out again. Not the sign of a winner. Ohh dear.

No need to reply Heb, i have just discovered why you are so bitter.

0 Jun 2022 12:40

I wonder as well BP?

Sold all my shares (again), definitely won't be back for any more, no smoke without fire in this company, lurches from one calamity to another without any thought for the poor shareholder.

Understand if you hold shares for sentimental reasons (which I did, living near to Arnish) it's not an investable company at the moment. AIM shares are a gamble, we all know that, but HARL is just flogging a dead horse, there are much better run and profitable AIM companies to invest in.

Goodbye (and good luck - you will need it).

Sold out and missed the big rerate. Ohh dear Ohh dear.

Heb, a very simple question. Why are you hear. Why have you posted even 1 post. You are not a shareholder, i am. Are you a bitter ex INFA shareholder. Please, isnt it about time that you started telling the truth. We eagerly await a sensible and truthful reply. ( Although we know that we wont get it).

Now the pesky little flies have been swatted away, let us return to more important subjects ( for genuine shareholders and those who hope to be ).

Who mentioned you Heb. Wonder why you would associate yourself with the last post. Hmm interesting. Can you imagine what type of person you have to be , who as a non holder posts on a Sunday. Nowt strange as folk , as the old saying goes.

What will the Court of Appeal Judgement be.

The Court of Appeal is likely to consider the balance between environmental concerns and the strategic importance of the project. If the respondent successfully demonstrates thorough compliance with legal requirements and significant economic and strategic benefits, the appeal by No Gas Caverns Ltd & FOE will be turned down.

Is it allowed to Pop a Cork before Mid day. Why was a van seen delivering a number of crates from https://www.directwineshipments.com last week to HARLs headquarters. Say no more .

Unfortunately for Yachtsman on the Rocks, his argument has already been proven to be a complete fabrication. Our resident expert , who currently works in the industry, as opposed to having been sacked from it, says 2-3 years to Working Caverns. I know who i trust.

Arguments against the appeal.

Comprehensive Environmental Assessments:

Counter: The respondent can demonstrate that extensive environmental assessments were conducted, adhering to regulatory standards.

Details: They have presented evidence that all potential impacts were thoroughly evaluated and mitigation measures are in place.

Alignment with Energy Policies:

Counter: The project aligns with national energy policies aimed at securing energy supply.

Details: The respondent has argude that the project is essential for national energy security and has been approved in line with government policies and strategic interests.

Economic and Strategic Importance:

Counter: The economic benefits and strategic importance outweigh the potential negative impacts.

Details: The respondent has highlighted the job creation, economic growth, and strategic benefits of the project, arguing that these factors justify the approval.

Regulatory Compliance:

Counter: The project complies with all regulatory and legal requirements.

Details: The respondent has shown that the project has met all necessary legal criteria and procedural requirements, leaving no grounds for judicial review.

Previous Court Decisions:

Counter: Lower court decisions support the legality and appropriateness of the project approval.

Details: The respondent has referenced previous rulings that have upheld the approval, suggesting that there is no new basis for overturning these decisions.

For those new to the B.B. I have attempted to sum up the arguments ( in layman's terms )In the matter of an application by No Gas Caverns Ltd & FOE for Judicial Review.

Legal Arguments by No Gas Caverns Ltd & FOE:

Environmental Impact:

Claim: The development poses significant risks to the local environment, particularly the marine ecosystem.

Details: The appellants argue that the environmental impact assessment was insufficient and did not fully account for the potential damage to local wildlife, water quality, and the broader ecosystem.

Climate Change Concerns:

Claim: The project contradicts national and international commitments to reducing carbon emissions.

Details: They contend that approving such projects undermines efforts to combat climate change, as it encourages reliance on fossil fuels.

Public Health and Safety:

Claim: There are substantial risks to public health and safety.

Details: The appellants may highlight potential hazards related to gas storage, such as leaks or explosions, which could endanger nearby communities.

Legal and Procedural Errors:

Claim: Procedural irregularities in the approval process.

Details: They argue that there were flaws in the consultation process, lack of transparency, or non-compliance with statutory requirements.

I believe that the final argument is the most important with regard to the Appeals decision.