Member Info for casapinos

Fleccy as I have come to expect from you, your research is patient and thorough, what you may have missed however is that LTI's posts are entirely fiction.

Pure G.... thanks. I do wonder though whether a "rolls SMR power station" is actually made up of much more than one SMR, it would be surprisingly confident of RR to claim a 15 fold increase from the Sub engines at this stage of development, and the 60 year claim is also, is suspect based on the replacement of the individual reactors over that time span.

Conv... where did you get the 470MW figure from?
And there is NO WAY a wind turbine costs £1.8bill, I assume that it's £1.8mill each ie £270 mill for 180 which illustrates that they are slightly cheaper for the same quantity of power but obviously don't provide "always-on". Finally given that conventional nukes have a planned lifetime of about 30 years, where did you get the 60 year number?
Given that I've questioned your sources mine are the FT , BNF and RR.

Lots of chatter about these so as is my habit I've put my research cap on and offer a few comments which, so far as I am aware, haven't been identified here.
Conventional nukes cost ~£20-25bill, CURRENT est for Hinckley point is £23bill, RR believe they can produce an SMR for about £2bill.
Conventional Nuke stations produce between 500MW to 1000 MW, RR are broadly basing their design on the nukes for submarines, BUT they currently can generate only about 30MW so they need to scale up by a factor of 3+ to match the conventional stations for cost/benefit, though they may get deals on the basis of much shorter lead times, even if they cost more per unit than conventional.
RR owns 80% of the joint venture project, others are Qatar, BNF(British nuclear fuels) and there is Gov money but it appears that the Gov hold no equity.

Boyo....... I know I am a talented and incisive poster but even I didn't expect my post to drive a 2.5% bounce in Brent!!

Victor......while I'm not an obsessive buyback watcher it looks as though average daily volumes are between 250 and 300 mill , so on the basis that MS are not allowed to go above 25% of the daily average for the previous month, I've no doubt someone can compute how close to the limit they're are running and hence roughly what the daily maxima might be.

Boyo - I'm not so sure that oil prices will ease , there's a piece in today's FT suggesting that Russia's oil output has already fallen by 1mbbl/day and will fall by another 1mbbl/day by the end of the month , that reduces Russia's output from 11m to below 9m accounting for at least 2% of world production and it's clear that OPEC are not inclined to ramp up - why would they flow more to drive the price down? I expect POO to remain elevated for months yet, even a cessation of hostilities in Ukraine isn't going to have countries rushing to buy Russian oil.

I read the board fairly closely but tend to ignore those who post 30/40 times per day.Though to be fair at 00.54 on 10 April you did make a useful post!!!

LTI.....buy or sell ? or is it that whichever way the SP goes you will claim to have made a profit?

yeah most of the thread with the vulgar title has gone (in the midst of me typing a lengthy reply to a query from LTI!!)perhaps the mods objected to my forensic calling out of F***Y!

Damay you're spot on ! I won't bore you with the details but essentially a recent EU change (MIFID II) had the unintended consequence of devaluing almost all analysis profits from the investment banks ,so they unsurprisingly cut expenditure and this superfical appraoch is the result!. if you can rely on your own judgement, do so!

Tried to reformat still NFG!! sorry

Damay.. thanks for the reply .One point I think is worth making with a simple example. First let's recognise that the most important thing for a company is to make a profit and the easiest way to measure that is byEPS(earnings per share) which is the measure JPM have reviewed and sharply lowered . I hope this very simple example will reveal their logic.

Revenue costs profit change in profit figure
11 9 2 +100%
10 9 1
9 9 0 -100%

I hope you see that the profit figure reacts disproportionately to smallish changes in the others.

It is that which prompts the eps downgrades in the JPM report and hence the very big change in expectations.

the formatting on this site is cr*p. For my response to Damay imagine the numbers actually fall under the headings , it should then make sense, I hope

Olmed.... IIRC it was Goldmans who did the books for Greece, and of course produced the answer that both the Greeks and the EU wanted.

Damay.. thanks for the reply .One point I think is worth making with a simple example. First let's recognise that the most important thing for a company is to make a profit and the easiest way to measure that is byEPS(earnings per share) which is the measure JPM have reviewed and sharply lowered . I hope this very simple example will reveal their logic.

Revenue costs profit change in profit figure
11 9 2 +100%
10 9 1
9 9 0 -100%

I hope you see that the profit figure reacts disproportionately to smallish changes in the others.

It is that which prompts the eps downgrades in the JPM report and hence the very big change in expectations.

I have been watching the outpouring of bile and frustration here over the last few days , the allegations of corruption and the pointless attempts to somehow influnce JPM. It is a waste of time , why? because in simple terms they are right.
I have done a bit of homework and it looks to me as though with the microscopic analysis of the numbers their prediction of a fall in EPS over at least the next two years they won't be far wide of the mark.
Should anyone be interested I can publish the numbers in another post but on the basis that emotion rather than analysis rules here I'll explain why, even if they are right it won't matter to anyone with a medium to long term perspective(and by the way if you're here for aquick buck you are wasting your time unless, you strike lucky with a short term spike).
So don't bother with JPM's microscope , get out the telescope and look in to the future , maybe 2/3years ahead, lets hope that long haul flying is back to normal levels and note that "civils"in 2019 earned RR £8.1 bill and made a slight profit, that won't be emulated this year and the results for the year which will be published in Spring 2023 will (in all probability) still show a loss, or maybe a small profit . BUT absent another major crisis and assuming some military stability has emerged in Ukraine , even if that is a bogged down war of attrition, the 2023 year might show a return to significant profitabilty for RR civils and power sytems and that together with news on SMR's and a significant ramp up in defence spending may mean that RR has overall revenues revenues of £16 -20bill, and if they aren't making profits on that we should all abandon them .
But to return to the point that is vexing most of you, JPM aren't offering analysis for that far ahead , their target market is investment managers who will be judged on this years outturn and hence may well have recently dumped RR with the intention of using the proceeds where it will earn more THIS YEAR.If you want to do that you should copy them , else if like me, you have a longer horizon you can choose to sit tight, hopefully understanding how long you may have to wait .

Article in the telegraph today describing shell's plans to invest in a hydrogen plant on humberside,(in a joint venture with Uniper of Germany) to make hydrogen from natural gas and store waste carbon in North sea, article also says "shell plans to invest £25 bill in uk in next decade , mostly in low carbon products."

the key line from the JPM statement is this
"As a result of these new investments and lower expectations for the Civil Aero division"
which shows they have drawn the same conclusion as I did from yesterday's Heathrow figures. Ie this year RR revenues will be sharply lower.
last year Civil produced £4.5 of RR's £10.9 bill revenues, this year, even if long haul travel jumps sharply this summer civils revenues will probably be in the £3-4 bill range and overall revenues below £10 bill.
That doesn't sound so bad but if you then take that down through the figures you get to an operating profit, which last year was only £124 mill, and which they are predicting this year to be barely positive and an EPS figure of ~0.3p per share.(the 77%downgrade)
So what !
iIhope that none here is investing for a divi this year or next and that we all realise that RR's future depends upon surviving the covid crisis, maintaining (and increasing) revenue streams in defence and power systems and getting to a point where the new developments on the horizon start to bear fruit, initially in orders and subsequently in profits and a rising SP.
All in all, I am happy that once the investment community recognise that the JPM statement is little more than the blindingly obvious the SP will start a slow recovery.

Falky .....we both know the thruth (or at least I do) I will not clutter up the board with responding further.