The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Missed the opportunity to buy into these about 3 years ago. Have been following what’s going and decided today to come in. So have purchased based on good figures, good outlook and would now be very surprised if any reversion of the court case happened.
Definitely agree with you tpinvest. In so many ways EV seems to be a poor choice. Production very polluting, poor range and performance in the cold, charging networks etc etc. Hydrogen makes far more sense as a cleaner more usable fuel. Can’t help but think that this EV malarkey is just a fad, designed to part those easily parted with their cash.
Thanks for the replies much appreciated.
I’ve decided to get small positions in both as I’m looking to diversify my portfolio. As you’ve said WPM is on a much greater scale so is more of a big dependable play in the current environment whilst TRR being very small and early in its development has more potential to surprise
Hi all,
Any views here as to the merits of TRR vs WPM. TRR has a broader selection of material it gets royalties from whereas WPM seems to be more concentrated into the precious metals space. But what are thoughts on how that will pan out with the US looking like it will be going into recession later this year and the knock on effect that would have on world markets.
Just seems to be the way at the moment. Almost everything that has good results gets hammered on results day. If I’d sold every time before results this year and then bought back again on big drops on good results I’d be in a much better position
Looks ok until you see the following
· Statutory loss before tax of £86.8m on an IFRS 16 basis (2021: loss of £35.2m) 147% increase ? Why?
· Net debt of £185.7m on a pre IFRS 16 basis (2021: £171.6m), Net debt/EBITDA1 at 2.2x (2021: 2.1x).
https://twitter.com/scswsharewatch/status/1618542518781763584?s=46&t=23KTZzzRviQfZXWl8EpKVQ
Tweeted today by scsw
I saw in an interview that the contract has to have a minimum 60% uk content. So will that equate to 60% H&W.
In an interview late last year John Wood, H&W group chief executive, insisted the contract would strengthen “UK sovereign design and shipbuilding capability, as well as generating around £1.4bn in national social and economic value”.
He played down union fears that work would migrate to Spain, saying the contract would have a “minimum UK content of 60 per cent”.
The partnership with Navantia, he added, would enable the consortium to “deliver the vessels on time and on budget, something which UK shipbuilding have never managed to do”.
60% of that contract would be huge