Member Info for riskawar

Just watched 2hrs plus of the RR investor presentation, definitely worth a watch for all LTH. Helen the CFO couldn’t stop smiling - was beautiful to see.

A good few nuggets in there as to future growth:

One I very much liked was “SMRs cash positive from day 1 of build with a cost plus contract”, no having to wait the 4-5year construction before seeing a return - Boom.💥

Another narrow bodies, “everyone is talking to us & we are talking to everybody”- I reckon demand is going to be huge but we will have to wait longer for them I reckon - beyond 2028.

Any increase on defence will be done over decades, I don’t think it will have a material affect on the short term national finances. It’s more important for Eastern European countries to up their defence spending faster, many of which are now doing.

I can’t see the UK government ever giving up the golden share in RR, our nuclear deterrent is just too important to hand to another country.

I agree that RR don’t really want to run SMRs when built however that’s why they’re partnering with Constellation, / CEZ etc.

I also agree that funding SMRs by the gov is an issue as we’re skint, but that’s more about prioritisation of existing spend. Although no decision on winners of SMRs will be announced in the Spring statement I do think they’ll allocate money for it at that point, with decision early June now on winners.

All indications are that there will be two winners to spread risk, it would also head off some future legal challenges, I am expecting RR to be the majority tho. Obviously as an investor I would be delighted if it was 100% RR so hope Nettles is correct. 🤞

I’m reckon it’ll be two winners: RR for the bulk on 2 existing sites & GE/Hitachi to keep the US happy on another. Reeves desperately needs the growth so bulk will go to RR is my bet. It’s the least risky technology wise, most power output & furthest through regulations.

Completely agree too, you’re not missing anything, the large EDF nuclear power stations have been a financial disaster. Maybe it’s the reason they’re holding off on investment decision in Sizewell C? 6 or 8 SMRs make more sense to me aswell.

All this talk about SMRs on non designated current nuclear approved sites would add years to any build, let’s get the ball rolling first on existing sites first where the opposition is a lot less.

Another mention in The Guardian that decision on SMR winners for UK will be at the Spring Statement, yet to see it mentioned in another source tho, but it is a left leaning paper - som maybe they are correct?

I’ve also made large gains in both RR & IAG, still holding, now they’re over 90% of my portfolio. My view with IAG is much like yours, take a good look at results and if as expected no downside surprises then at least hold into summer.

I also don’t know where else to put it, at some point Boeing will recover but I think it’s too early to park any money there yet. Am not interested in gambling on AIM or other tiny companies, I’m generally happy to hold for a few years and double or 5x my money (in the case of RR). With a tailwind I can see 400-450p by end of summer, but will keep reassessing and reading as much as I can on relevant news to inform any sell decision. I’m likely to sell down gradually as unfortunately not all mine is in an ISA/SIPP so I have some capital gains issues.

JPMorgan 5.50 Eur, that’s £4.56, another 33% from today’s closing if correct. Has held up well today, looking forward to a strong lead up to results - Happy days!!! ✈️

I would also add that the returns from the last 4-5 year post covid period aren’t normal and shouldn’t be used as an expectation going forward. It will be significantly harder to make the same returns over the next 5 years.

Not financial advice - If you’ve got a reasonable timescale, so min 10years then I would say it has to be equities for the best return. You won’t get anything like a 20% return without being able to pick winning sectors and that is a risk in itself. High dividend paying funds tend to be companies in more mature markets, banking, insurance etc and you are unlikely to get sustained high growth in those areas. I would say similar to a previous response you should be targeting maybe a 7-8% return instead. If you did want to take a risk for significantly higher % then you will either need to pick individual companies, specific geographical region or business sector & return will be down to your own foresight and/or luck.

I think there’s still space for a higher market cap, so am likely to hold throughout the summer if results are good. You can’t just look at one metric, IAG have been able to up their prices, for starters the market cap from 2019 can be increased by inflation for the last 5 years. Still a travel boom with a leaner company continuing to make further improvements.

Hopefully results also boosted by the £200m-£400m? For the 20% stake from CEZ. Debt should be close to being wiped out too?

Nice post TJ, bit of a Freudian Slip at 4:23 ? 🤞😂

SMR decision date was from the previously posted Guardian article, about 10ish paragraphs down it mentions SMR winners announced at Spring statement. & 2 winners expected.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/15/a-viable-business-rolls-royce-banking-on-success-of-small-modular-reactors

You posted this on the wrong board, this is IAG not ING.

I totally agree with all your points Svend. If it’s in the interest of the pensioners in the scheme then I’m perfectly ok with it, but it should be up to the scheme to decide what level of risk/return they should be targeting. It’s not a governments place to state a % of the scheme (for example) that should be invested in uk companies/infrastructure if there is better risk/return elsewhere.

Unfortunately most things the UK government get involved in end up worse - & in record time with this government. 😂

Hope nobody was 3x leveraged in Nvidia - brutal.

Wonder if we will get a steer from Reeves this week on using pension funds for SMRs? Can’t say I’m a big fan of that idea even if I do stand to benefit from my RR holding - think pension funds shouldn’t be forced to invest in uk infrastructure if the are better returns for their pensioners elsewhere.

648 from me, I’m thinking the big rise for this will be spring budget day.

Https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/rolls-royce-wins-11-billion-uk-nuclear-submarine-contract-2025-01-24/

Not sure I like the Swedish call for a bulk buy on smrs, think I prefer the cashback/price reduction for early adopters funded by the slower movers. Just don’t want it to get mired in EU bureaucracy. Lots of demand out there just needs someone to take a leap of faith and be first mover - in a sane world this would be the UK gov, but we are blessed with Millipede instead. Hoping he’s going to be forced into it by Reeves and co as a growth agenda, as apparently that was no1 priority of labour despite all the evidence to the contrary.

My take is that it’s worth holding onto these until full year results out next month (which I believe will be great) and then reassessing. Currently we have a P/E of around 7 which isn’t expensive by any stretch of the imagination. I suspect the P/E will drop further next month on results (if the share price doesn’t continue its rise in the interim).

Travel is booming and shows no sign of slowing down, record number of passengers and industry leading operating margins that i still feel aren’t fully reflected in the share price. I can see this hitting £4 by end of 2025, especially if there’s a decent final divi & buy backs continue. Other airlines seem to be struggling more with aircraft mtce/availability issues (especially Ryanair), I think the larger IAG group has enabled them to be more flexible, and they’ve been able to capitalise on their competitors woes - not long for confirmation.