Member Info for stokey12

Kaeren ref 13.24 post I will have a listen of the market update to see if it gives context to the decision to sell. I will also take into account the views you express in your post as well as both Pokerchips and Bubble2021 before deciding to go back to a buy opinion. As a general rule it is worthwhile having a trigger to reconsider your investment. It is unfortunate that the Killik holding was one of them.

Bubble2021 ref 11.07 That is why I was spooked the fact that they stood by HARL when HARL was at an all time low meant that I had them as a warning signal. Hopefully they will start buying back in again.

Oranolio1 ref 10.16 post If I was a deramper on 16 November I would not have posted that the MoD were going to give a written statement on shipbuilding update. This was posted if you check my post history BEFORE trading started so people were able to jump the gun and trade right on market open. I have told you twice now that I hold my shares in my SIPP so it is not in my interest to deramp. Did you actually read my first post of the morning it was a balanced and as far as I know accurate assessment of where HARL is at present. Another indicator that I am not a deramper is that I went from Buy to Hold if I was a deramper surely I would have gone from buy to sell.

MickR ref 09.58 post I take your point but I note that this is the second TR1 from them this month. On previous occasions a sell TR1 from is very quickly followed by a buy TR1. This did not follow that pattern. I also find it intriguing that the previous sell was on the 9 August the week before the FSS decision but at a time when there were rumours about the decision.

LSE03 ref 08.58 post In see that Killik have just posted a TR1 as a result I am moving HARL from BUY to HOLD they have been supportive up to now but this is the second TR1 in the row where they have sold shares what is your view.

I note that this was from Killik & Co. who have bought their shareholding down to 10.99. Killik or their clients have stood by HARL since even before I was a shareholder. As this is a minor concern I am changing my opinion to HOLD. While the fundamentals remain the same the fact that this is the second TR1 from Killick and represents a total reduction of Killik's holdings representing 2% of the issued share capital requires caution and this is not a deramp it is just me expressing a view on the actions of a major shareholder. As I hold shares in HARL as part of my SIPP I do need to be cautious as this is a long term holding.

xenor ref 08.10 I am confused you say 4% down in your post this is not what the London Stock Exchange was saying at the time. Is it possible to post accurate information. I would not subscribe any reason to the current share price as there could be any number of reasons for the drop in the share price.

Oranolio1 ref 07.43 post do you wish to post a contrary analysis of my summary from this morning do you want to just carry on posting half truths and inaccuracies?

continuing from my 07.23 post

Renewables

This is perhaps the area with greatest revenue potential. With the director buys of last week I would not expect any significant contract news till Q1 2023. H&W sites at Methil and Arnish are the two sites to have the most potential. Arnish will benefit from the Stornoway Masterplan with a link road to the new Deepwater Terminal which is due for completion in 2023. Based on the number of proposed wind farms and the fabrication footprint HARL I would expect that revenues would reach into seven figures.

Ship Repair/Conversion

This is one area where facts are hard to come by. Going by HARL's turnover which has gone up in two or so tears from nil to £15m revenues are in the low eight figures. I am aware of one potential conversion which would bring in significant revenue during FY24

As a new trading week starts and in view of all the ramping over the last week I thought it might be useful to give a breakdown of where I believe we are with the various potential revenue streams.

FSS

Team Resolute, which includes HARL, has been named preferred bidder on this £1.67bn (before inflation) contract. From a written parliamentary answer we know the uplift for inflation will not be applied before the contract is signed. From another parliamentary answer this one dated 24 November a rough breakdown of where work is done. This answer does not give a breakdown of the percentage of work to be done by each party. It gives implicit support for the upper limit of the range referred to by mcadder. I doubt that it could support the upper limit suggested by FormerFD. All parliamentary answers can be found here you may wish to adjust the filters rather than wade threw all 93 questions https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions?SearchTerm=Fleet+Solid+Support&DateFrom=10%2F05%2F2022&DateTo=28%2F04%2F2023&AnsweredFrom=&AnsweredTo=&House=Commons&Answered=Any&Expanded=True

In relation to the margin on this contract most responsible posters on here have used a margin figure of 20% in line with the blended margin rate achieved by HARL. TortoiseHare has argued that the margin rate in line with what other defence contract have achieved would be 10% or less. This view is supported by the half year report from BAB who did not achieve a margin rate of 6%. So we may get a lower margin than assumed to date.

IslandMagee

The marine license for this project has been granted and is subject to a Judicial Review which will be heard in January 2023. I would expect the decision sometime in Q1 2023. It is important to note that while the hearing is in mid January the ruling may not be in the same month. After the decision one of two things could happen. First the Judicial Review is dismissed and our friends at No Gas Caverns could accept the decision and let the project go ahead. Personally I think this is the least likely. In which the construction of the salt caverns can go ahead. Second option is that the Judicial Review is allowed in whole or in part which results in an appeal by DAERA. I would hope that any appeal is expedited and heard in 2023.
After the marine license is resolved then construction of the caverns can start this will take about 2 - 3 years. There was some grossly irresponsible ramping suggesting that IM would be in operation imminently this is factually incorrect. Anticipated revenues from IM when it starts operating based on the 2019 term sheet adjusted for changes since then is around £150m.

I will cover the other streams in another hopefully shorter post. Reasoned debate and discussion welcomed.

TortoiseHares ref 17.31 post on checking the Half Year Report for BAB who were one of the main members of Team UK I note their margin is less than 6%. With the automation coming from the knowledge transfer under the contract hopefully HARL will get higher margins.

A twitter thread worth reading. https://twitter.com/KevanJonesMP/status/1596858074215550976

Oranolio1 ref 15.19 post If I follow you anyone who says any thing that can be viewed as negative is deramping. That would seem to mean that a debate on the correct margin on the contract or the percentage of the work that HARL will get is deramping. I disprove of both ramping and deramping but believe there should be courteous debate and where appropriate criticism of the BoD.

Oranolio1 ref 14.57 post can I ask how are you defining a deramping post as opposed to a post intended to stimulate debate or impart information. Also in your post you state 'Then we can add the very significant and imminent gas storage contracts. ' Can you clarify what you mean by this as we still have not had the JR hearing in relation to IslandMagee which still has not been built.

TortoiseHares ref 14.29 post the difficulty is that the information online is not current and would appear to be reporting figures from financial periods two years ago. The question is how reflective are those of current margins. HARL has consistently reported blended margins in excess of 20%. This year is the first year that any figures from defence work will appear in the accounts. But here this is a multi year so it may not be until FY24 accounts that we get confirmation of the margin achieved. However in the absence of current data I would go with HARL's historical margins of around 20%.

Gillybg ref 13.04 post that story has to be read together with the written answer given by the Honourable and Learned Member for Cheltenham to the Right Honourable Member for Wentworth and Dearne on 24 November. On reading that answer that the work to be done by HARL will be closer to 60% than 50%. It has to be remembered that it is for Team Resolute not the MoD to share out the work between each party subject of course to any contractual obligations.

mcadder ref 11.15 post As far as I am aware a probe by the Defence Select Committee will not affect the timing of when the contract will be signed. It might have an effect on future procurements and that is at best. The only reason for making a submission is to get your views on the record.

FormerFD ref 11.19 The problem is not with mcadder but with you not understanding what mcadder said. After stating the contract length it clearly says 'somewhere between 40% -60%'. So he is clearly saying that HARL could get as low as 40% or as high as 60%. As a matter of fact while mcadder says somewhere between 40 and 60% if you look at the answer from The Honourable Member for Cheltenham to the Right Honourable Member for Wentworth and Dearne on 24 November where he says. '

24 November 2022

The majority of the work will be carried out in the UK. The mid and forward sections of the ships will be built by Harland & Wolff shipyards in Belfast and Appledore. Following arrival of aft blocks from Spain, final outfitting, integration of blocks and modules and sensitive systems, as well as all testing and commissioning will take place in Belfast.'

I am not sure if mcadder saw that answer amongst all the idiotic answers but it is clear that the percentage of work is likely to be at the higher end of the range he quoted.

mcadder ref 19.50 post Thanks for this fair assessment. With a bit of caution I would like to pick up on one point. No iy is not on whether HARL could get 40% of the work. I recall previous articles which had said they could get only 30%. I think it has only been in the last few months that the 60% figure has started to be mentioned.

The point I wanted to pick up on is when revenues would start on the FSS contract. You quite correctly said construction will start in 2025. However pre construction enabling works start next year as I understand it. In one of his interviews I thought JW made reference to revenue generating work in 2023 and 2024.

LSE03 ref 21.18 post I have checked the Defence Committee webpage and no inquiry had been formally launched yet. That said I am sure one is coming. Any person or group has the right to submit written evidence to the committee. If anyone wants to work on a submission then follow mvbooks2 on twitter and let me know your username on here. I will follow back those who I want to work with.