The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
If these shipbuilding contracts are serious and would offer a great deal to community, then one of the most significant things that could happen next, aside from a contract, would be if H&W announced a workable, revolving credit facility. Much is done regularly to assist ailing businesses (remember all those covid grants), so it seems blindly obvious that someone from government should be 'having a word' on behalf of H&W to get the ball rolling on this facility. It would mean continuity, not only for shareholders, but for the company itself.
Let's see where this winds up. I remain hopeful there's going to be a contract and a debt facility announced this side of Christmas, in whichever order they have to work.
Lottie you have a valid point that some posts read like the poster wants the company to fail. However, since the 1 post crowd have turned up, I would guess what they actually want is a lower share price to buy.
Stokey - 'So what action is needed to get the share price moving?'
I think confirmation of the revolving credit facility and the amounts involved would be 1 piece in the puzzle, along with 1 chunky contract. Contract first, credit facility second. Perhaps overly optimistic, but that's 2 key pieces which would pivot things. Buyers still coming through in any case, so sentiment can't be totally shot to pieces.
Right, let's talk about the new shares and the share price between now and end of year. Who is going to sell sub 20p? I didn't see warrants on the placing offer so the institutions and individuals, so who is going to be selling their shares below 20p without warrants at a discount to make the loss back.
So who else does that leave? Last placing, 30p right? So not them. Anyone buying between 16p and 20p might sell some, but more likely the traders were out by the time of the retrace from 27p to 24p a week or two ago, so who does that leave? Anyone not trading and buying from 16p has to be in for more than a 3/4p prize. Some people might sell to buy back cheaper or might simply want to crystallise their loss.
So 20p may be the support or the resistance going forward, not sure which, but I will keep reminding myself the people who will want to sell sub 20p should be few and far between.
Stokey - thanks for the explanation, I see what you're saying now.
I hope tomorrow brings a brighter day. Today has been a bit of a shocker and I am braced for a choppy share price for a short period, but I am hopeful that it will recover. Good luck all.
Stokey - what do you mean by 'I am assuming that there will be a call against it.'? I am not sure I understand - you think they'll lose it or you think they'll correct the report?
If other news could impact the terms but isn't here yet, they may be bridging the time to get to that. But like many I am super disappointed. I wasn't holding when the 'no more placings' promise was made so I suppose I am only once bitten here and will take it all at face value. Let's see what happens over 3 months +.
Stokey - your post at 9.28. You make a good point with that excerpt, I always forget exactly what I have read immediately after news.
Your question:
'So if as it says there are term sheets on the table why not conclude those negotiations rather than inflict more pain on shareholders.'
Short answer, we don't know, but either they have been offered rubbish terms across the board or they know they could secure more positive terms and have chosen this route to stall for time. Or they are lying outright I suppose, but I doubt that is the case. We have no way to know who has offered what and on what terms.
Stokey - my interpretation of the RNS is that they have yet to secure the credit facility so the raise is bridging a gap.
"As we move into an anticipated annualised cash breakeven position towards the end of 2021, there is now a clear path to profitability in 2022. Furthermore, a cash generative position would facilitate securing corporate debt to supplement our working capital requirements and support growth in the business. "
What that says to me is that the contract cash flow from the contract wins they have made needs to catch up and start getting banked so that they can secure the credit facility on workable terms. At least that's the way I'm reading it.
Stokey - Your reply "The issue with the MCap for most shareholders is that it does not seem to represent fair value for HARL. "
Yes. That's basically it. I've missed the posts discussing that somewhere along the line (or forgot I read them, ha!).
I think with a bit more time and the coverage HARL give of day to day activities, things should start to change on that front.
Also to say, I know Wise has high ambitions for HARL and I largely agree with his opinions on the potential for significant contracts and what that means in terms of re-rates. I am asking for other opinions to get a sense of what other shareholders think.
Stokey12: You said to Lotty "On net profit on my £100m estimate gross margins would be circa £24m so I would expect net profits to be in the £5-8m based on current administrative expenses."
I don't normally post but I have been thinking a lot about another share (Pharma, I could name it if needed) - that stock had revenue / profit this year, forecast to be around 40m / 5-8m and it was holding an mcap of around 250-300m. It doesn't have that much potential to scale up, in fact its fallen back to around 150m now (this is all from memory and obviously mcap moves around).
My main point is that I keep wondering what shareholders here actually expect from the HARL mcap with that kind of revenue and profit forecast? Are people looking at profit of 8m with a PE of 4 to 5, or is there a different PE that is more likely?
That's notwithstanding larger contracts being possibly won and the share being forward looking on any such contracts.
Dave Finney - You might think you 'just came across GCAT today' following the RNS, but you've looked at the stock before on the 4th Oct21. Its on your posting history. If you're interested in more information, you can track back and read the replies people gave you when you posted over a month ago too. DYOR.
Busy divesting most of my shares and sold this one at a loss. Not sorry to see it go but sorry that it has not lived up to its potential so far. Think by the time I am done I'll only be keeping one certain infamous miner who has a JORC out shortly. Good luck all, I hope the seller clears and this moves up to fair value.
I am sure this has way more to run, but sadly a cash call means I am out. Super disappointed to be out, but BEN has been good to me. Good luck all and enjoy the next leg up.
100% confident that my behaviours fall the right side of the law John / Chris / MJard / Amanda (and whichever other names you have used). How about you? I wonder what multitude of damning posting history the cops would find if they had a dig around. Still, crack on, the more you post, the more there will be when the law catches up with you, which can only be a matter of time.
Tick tock.
Where would the cops start, I wonder, with this idea of prosecuting share price manipulators? Would they go after the people using multiple pseudonyms first, as they're the easier cases to build? After all, if someone admits they're not invested, then keeps coming back under multiple names, even when banned, that's got to be the easiest case to build, to show a pattern of behaviour over time. It wouldn't take much to find an 'expert' to correlate all the posts together and all the email addresses would have the same IP address anyway! Put it together with records of the person maybe buying low, selling high, or not holding when they claim they do - and it paints a certain picture. Compare that to someone who always posts from the same account and holds their stock consistently over time - different picture, much harder to draw a conclusion there. Cops will always go for the easier prosecution. To think some people assume the LSE disclaimer protects THEM, when actually its purely there to protect LSE from any legal issues. Its a bit like hate crime isn't it? The person may think they are free to say whatever they like in a democratic society, but the law says otherwise and we know it catches up with people eventually. Just a matter of time.
That's what the legal system is too John / Chris / MJArd - opinion based on apparent facts. Its the pulling together of evidence and then a jury forms an opinion of it and decides if the person is guilty of a crime, for example attempted share price manipulation.
Share price manipulation isn't utter nonsense, its a serious crime and prosecutions will catch up with the offenders in due course. They won't look at one or two posts, they will look at a patten of behaviour over time. Is the individual persistent in their cause? Do they post their opinion once and then leave it or do they keep making up pseudonyms to keep on coming back and saying the same things over and over again.
Mark my words, prosecutions are coming and anyone using these boards to manipulate share prices will wake up one day to find their door being kicked down by a big burly officer.
Before I forget and while we are on the subject of illegal share price manipulation - it reminds me of that guy in the US who was ramping stocks and selling as he ramped. He was just a regular guy sitting at home. In prison now for share price manipulation. I bet that was a bit of a shock, but I guess it works both ways, with illegal manipulation of share prices up or down for personal gain.
I guess its a new crime the police are looking at here if the US are paving the way on prosecutions. They can just get the IP address, swoop on the house, take the computer, and look through buying and selling history versus posts to figure out what someone is up to. Full audit trail. Cheap to prosecute compared to some crimes I would think, as there's so much audit trail with the typing of posts. I imagine LSE keep full records of deleted posts, they'd have to under data protection and their IT teams could retrieve anything lost anyway. I remember someone who works in IT telling me nothing is ever really 'unrecoverable'.
Just in case though, I expect a few of us will have screen shots in case the cops ever tap us up for evidence.
All just in my humble opinion.
Good luck to those genuinely invested.
John 1977, you use the exact same language as Chris Holt / MJArd and the other pseudonyms you have used before. I have reported your post as illegal activity in an attempt to manipulate the share price.
This goes on so much, I consider it only a matter of time before LSE pass on all the emails and posting history of the worst board manipulators, so that the cops can swoop on a number of homes all in one go and make a big example of the worst offenders. Heck, they're probably already building their case. You'd never know until it hits the press. Its easy to find out the physical location for where the email account was signed up for as emails store the IP address of the accessing computer and the location of access.
When the time comes, good luck getting out of the charges, John / Chris / MJard. They will have all the posting history they need.
Tick tock.
All in my humble opinion.