Member Info for Nappers

Calling someone a twat isn't an investment argument.

If you disagree with my view on the ceasefire, explain why. Digging through my posting history and throwing insults just suggests you've got nothing else to offer.

GLA.

And your point?

Calling people "penny pinchers" doesn't change the fact that a temporary ceasefire isn't the same as a lasting peace agreement. Markets price risk, and the underlying issues are still there.

Different views are what make a market.

I can understand the frustration if you're deep underwater.

A dividend cut, if it happens, could put further pressure on the share price in the short term. But management may decide that preserving cash and strengthening the balance sheet is the right move for the longer-term health of the business.

As for "the days of 150 are in the past", markets have a habit of surprising both bulls and bears. Turnarounds take time, but writing off any possibility of recovery altogether may be just as risky as assuming one is guaranteed.

Just my view. GLA and DYOR.

It's not a peace deal, it's a temporary 60-day ceasefire.

A ceasefire can be viewed positively because it reduces the immediate risks of higher oil prices, airspace disruption and wider geopolitical uncertainty. That is generally supportive for airlines like Wizz.

But the market also knows that a ceasefire is not the same as a permanent settlement. The nuclear issue and longer-term security arrangements remain unresolved, and if negotiations break down, oil prices could rise again and sentiment could turn quickly.

For Wizz, my view is: • Short term: Positive for lower fuel costs and market confidence. • Medium term: Much depends on whether the ceasefire develops into a lasting peace agreement. • Risk: If the truce unravels, today's optimism could reverse just as quickly.

The market would do well to remember the difference.

DYOR.

Asimpleinvestor - Fair points, but I never said those measures alone would fund the entire increase in defence spending.

My point was simply that governments have more options than just raising taxes. Spending priorities can change, welfare can be reformed, economic growth can be encouraged and budgets can be reallocated.

Reasonable people can disagree on the mix, but I don't accept that higher taxes are the only solution.

By the way, great detail in your post.

This board is for constructive discussion about ALRT.

Cev and Ex you both bring great value to the LSE chat, but for goodness' sake, stop the bickering and grow up.

Let's focus on the business.

Asimpleinvestor - I don't agree that higher taxes are the only answer.

Encouraging more healthy people who are out of work back into employment, considering some form of national or civic service to kill two birds with one stone, and reducing the costs associated with illegal immigration and unlawful residency could all help ease pressure on the public finances.

It seems to me that governments have more than one lever to pull.

Makes you wonder what's going on behind the scenes.

Ex, I couldn't agree more. Thanks for the link.

Manifesto my last post was for Seadoc2

Not necessarily.

If a shorter thinks the long-term direction has changed, they may decide to close their position and bank their profits or cut their losses rather than risk getting caught by positive news.

It all comes down to their view of what's ahead.

Https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/hot-topics.html

My takeaway from Dan Jarvis's statement is that the UK needs to move faster and invest more intelligently in defence.

The focus appears to be on:

✔️ Increased defence spending.

✔️ Faster procurement.

✔️ Sovereign technology and AI.

✔️ Getting innovative capabilities into service more quickly.

✔️ Giving the Armed Forces the resources they need.

These are exactly the sort of themes many of us have been discussing on this board for weeks.

Interesting times.

GLA and DYOR.

Generally, when a share gets spiked, the bid/offer spread can widen dramatically. You either struggle to sell, or you end up getting much less than you expected.

I'd rather avoid the spike and wait for the pullback.

Today's action in ALRT is a prime example, in my opinion. One way to deal with that is to get on board, sit tight and, if it suits your strategy, top-slice and buy back on pullbacks.

Play the market and don't let the market play you.

DYOR.

I think he is a child with dementia

Simple. Ignore him or filter him.

TWK won't care either way, and the board will probably be a better read for it.

Hartygel - I don't think there's a magic number. Some specialist funds invest much earlier. Liquidity, contracts and commercial traction are probably just as important as market cap. A major MOD win could attract institutional interest well before any arbitrary threshold.

IMHO - DYOR

Just look at what's been discussed on this board over the last week.

For me, ALRT is becoming a bit of a no-brainer. It seems to be in the right sector at the right time.

As far as I'm aware, ALRT is one of the few UK Main Market companies offering everyday investors exposure to the emerging AI defence sector.

That alone makes it a very interesting proposition to me.

IMHO -GLA.

Excellent for ALRT if these priorities continue to gain momentum.

Nothing is guaranteed, but it's encouraging to see the MOD talking about exactly the sort of AI-enabled capabilities and rapid deployment model that ALRT appears to be targeting.

GLA and DYOR.

Frank6, I think it's more likely to drift lower while all the uncertainty remains. Once that clears, the market can start focusing on the fundamentals again.

If things go well, I see no reason why it couldn't exceed £16.50 by the end of the year.

Just my opinion. GLA and DYOR.