Member Info for stokey12

LSE03 ref 11.05 post reading your post bought this section of the RNS to mind. 'Another segment pertains to work vessels where the Company has completed its first in-house design for a 26m vessel with the optionality of various propulsion systems; diesel-mechanical, diesel-electric and full electric and this design basis has been used to tender for a dredger vessel for a UK based client. Given the flexibility of the design and the optionality on equipment and propulsion, the Company will be marketing its bespoke design to a larger commercial market; aquaculture, survey, dredging, freight and general work boat. ' So HARL has a ready to go design for these boats so can piggy back on this report to generate orders. I assume they want the full electric propulsion model.

The section in the RNS under defence is interesting I noted this 'To date, the Company has focused on fabrication and repair and maintenance services. The Company is now actively seeking through-life support opportunities (multi-year repairs and maintenance contracts of between five and ten years) and has identified over £300m of multi-year contracts that will have invitations to tender over the next 24-36 months.' This area of work would put HARL head to head with Cammell Laird who have some of these contracts. One of these contracts in this area likely to be coming up for tender during this period is the mainteance contract for the Tide Class of RFA replenishment tenders.

SYN00GOLD ref 08.54 post your maths is as bad as mine if the committed backlog is £900m over five years this equals £180m a year. So on the blended margin of circa 25% this gives £45m a year. I am not counting the pipeline as not enough information on it.

playingtheodds ref 08.27 post I think the original rise was caused by knee jerk reaction and we are now seeing the reaction who have had a coffee and time to think. What may be preying on their mind is whether HARL has taken on too much debt and can they deliver. As with others I suspect that the failure to meet the FY22 revenue forecasts is causing some people to pause. My view is that they should meet the FY23 revenue forecast.

JamesH85 ref 07.39 post Sorry I would be stretching the definition of personal use only to post it on here. You can register on www.cenkos.com it is free to register.

New Note out reading it now.

Lottie123 ref 07.21 post I am not concerned by the failure to mention IslandMagee. We had an update in November and nothing has changed so there is nothing to report on it. The FID will not be until after the JR in May assuming that the decision and hearing will both be in May.

I was not expecting this until the end of the month. One surprise for me was that the revenue figures were not changed from the previous update. Also I note with renewables the time to complete negotiations has been extended. That said we do not know when the negotiations started so we might see some completing this year. The rest is all good, energy which has not featured much to date in updates looks very promising there was an oblique mention to the SeaRose FPSO and I am confident of HARL's chances on that one as last time HARL worked on it the work was completedearly.

The surprise was the mention of a ship design this has potential for revenues from IP as well as building the ship. I note what was said aboout the Type 32 I note that Navy Outlook has discounted HARL getting this contract. It seems that this might be the first frigate in 10 years to go out to competitive tender. I also like that HARL will be bidding for the next CalMac ferry order and it looks like it will be at Methil.

go_ly_dow ref 15.20 post are you just making a wild guess or do youhave a factual basis you want to share.

Pokerchips ref 14.35 unless he does what some thought John Major would do and try and get an Act of Self Perpetuation. This is if I recall correctly the only Act that the Lords can block.

MaryBr90 ref 14.11 post That one rings bells fromwhen I studied contract law. If I remember correctly the courts held that there was a valid contract so they were liable for breach of contract.

Just saw this on the BBC website. I think they got the Court wrong though. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-64788448

MaryBr90 ref 13.13 post I did realise that there was a proposal for a Freeport in Northern Ireland. I would have thought that common sense would dictate that the freeport should be centred around Belfast Harbour.

MaryBr190 ref 13.09 post I am trying to workout whether the effect of the agreement that the 25% tarriff on steel going from Gb to NI no longer applies. The Defence Select Committee is putting pressure on MoD and HARL to commit to using British Steel for FSS. If the tariff no longer applies then that might make it easier to use British Steel.

In my 12.06 post it should read 'as good news some may not'

Fairy1 ref 11.30 post While you may view the news on the Windsor Framework as good news may not. To be fair aside from the news on steel tariffs it is not immediately clear how HARL is affected unless you have knowledge of all aspects of HARL. There are some on here who only look at the FSS contractbut there is more. The other issue is whether the DUP decides the Framework is enough to reenter power sharing. This issue is of direct importance and it maybe that some have concerns that we will still not have a functioning executive which HARL needs.

The link formy 10.12 post is https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/columnists/rishi-sunak-exclusive-as-the-sovereign-government-we-had-a-duty-to-protect-the-economic-rights-of-the-people-of-northern-ireland-guaranteed-in-the-act-of-union-and-the-1998-belfast-agreement-4043957

The Rt Hon Rishi Sunak PC MP penned thi article for the newsletter with an Honourable mention to HARL.

LSE03 ref 19.38 post More detail is needed on this. It is not clear if it is meant that NI gets to allow in upto 25% of steel from the UK. Alternatively doesit mean that NI gets to share in the EU's quota on steel. I think the latter is the correct one and is also is the least favourable to HARL.

AimMaster2018 ref 07.30 post we all know that but you said in your 06.12 post that this was going to be funded by a government handout. As this is NOT what the 1 February RNS says and I do not recall seeing any statement to that effect can you tell me where you got that from.