Member Info for stokey12

Iamsailing ref 12.55 post Having looked at Astra Asset Management's website which can be found here https://astra-amco.com/firm.html what puzzles me is why they are even talking to HARL. Going by the experience of the team members whose profiles can be found here https://astra-amco.com/people.html they sound like the kind of people who would work with companies that are looking for substantially more. The impression I get is that this is likely to be a more long term arrangement designed to help HARL grow.

Tonyh1975 ref 12.27 The only news they have come with so far is a debt refinancing. The contract we have been discussing is still to come and HARL will benefit from it as there are only two bidders left in it. My view is that we will hear within the next two weeks.

Bubble2021 ref 12.27 I noted it. I note also that with no explanation Chitta123 posted yesterday 'Expecting killik to have significantly reduced their holding.' Their holding remains above 10% of the share capital so I am not unduly concerned. I wonder if we will see a second TR1 from them bringing their holding back above 12%.

Chitta123 ref your 16.29 post from yesterday I see Killick have only reduced their holding by 1.22% not a significant amount . Where you expecting a greater sell off. This could be caused by a number of clients selling off shares

develbis ref 10.51 post The refinancing is with a different lender on different terms. When financial close has been reached the full details including interest rate payable would be available.

JL76 ref 08.39 post see my 08.02 post as this gives a possible reason for your first question.

I am not sure if anyone has noticed but this proposed facility is priced in GBP the current facility is priced in USD. The effect of this is that HARL has got an extra $10m based on the current exchange. Also the timing of financial close is interesting 4 - 6 weeks will bring us to year end. In addition the preferred bidder on the FSS contract will be known. I wonder will the facility be secured against the order book instead of all the assets. I ask as I do not see the assets supporting upto £100m of debt.

JL76 ref 07.32 post do you want to read the RNS this time objectively without any bias against either the company or JW. The RNS is titled Proposed New Debt Facility. It follows that the interest rate will be decided at financial close, the probably reason for this is that between now and financial close there will be a meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee and the interest rate might change causing a change in the interest charged on this facility. I am inclined to view this facility favourably on current information but will want to see the final deal at financial close.

Chitta123 ref 16.29 post Why?

Further to my 11.18 post in answer to the question from John Healey 'To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how he plans to announce the final decision on the award of the Fleet Solid Support ship contract; and if he will make a statement'
The answer from Alex Chalk the Defence Procurement Minister is 'The selection of the Preferred Bidder will be announced in due course, prior to the award of a manufacture contract. Parliament and all other interested parties will be informed of the decision in the usual manner.'

The wording is different from that used yesterday. However I do not think that it is much of a difference and he was just avoiding saying anything that could be construed as indicating when a decision will be made. One thing I can take from this answer is that Team UK and Team Resolute will be told the result about 10 days before anybody else. If feedback is sought this might delay the result being made public.

JL76 ref 14.28 post I checked it out. As both drugs have not completed Phase 1 trials it is sometime away from having a viable treatment.

This is the link to Hansard so you can read it https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-11-07/debates/C10614DA-BB65-4D55-8C6E-AFB92E3B8C14/FleetSolidSupportShips Clearly we all heard two verys we must have misheard as the official record only has one.

djm1 ref 12.38 post earlier today I posted the link to the Hansard report of the question. Hansard which is the official record of proceedings in Parliament has it as very soon only the one very. So clearly the Defence Secretary said very soon not very very soon. I interpret this to mean within a week. This will fit with a written answer due today.

Jabido ref 10.4 post If you are referring to this question from John Healey 'To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how he plans to announce the final decision on the award of the Fleet Solid Support ship contract; and if he will make a statement.' It isa written question so it has already been asked a written answer is due today when given it will be found on this link https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions?Answered=Any&AnsweredFrom=&AnsweredTo=&DateFrom=10%2F05%2F2022&DateTo=28%2F04%2F2023&Expanded=True&House=Bicameral&SearchTerm=Fleet%20Solid%20Support&Page=2.

Interestingly a new question has been asked by Kevan Jones with an answer due tomorrow. The question he asks is 'To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, who the prime contractor is on the Team Resolute bid for the Fleet Solid Support Ship contract.'

Fair question not sure what the answer is.

JL76 ref 08.36 post technically no contract has been cancelled as it never got to the preferred bidder status the possibility of the tender being withdrawn was always there. With regards to the Fleet Solid Support Ships the tender has already been pulled once. However the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Ships that they are due to replace are well beyond their normal lifespan and have to be replaced. It will therefore have to go ahead or risk the Queen Elizabeth Class of carriers becoming non operational as you cannot support them while at sea.

JL76 ref 07.45 post I am sure you realise that the National Flagship Tender was not the one we have been talking about. The discussion was about the £1.6bn Fleet Solid Support Ship contract. This contract will not be cancelled.

Davies102 ref 07.31 post The fact that everyone else heard two what is shown in Hansard is conclusive and admissible in Court as to what he said so there was only one.

Here is the link to the official record of yesterday's question on FSS. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-11-07/debates/C10614DA-BB65-4D55-8C6E-AFB92E3B8C14/FleetSolidSupportShips It seems that the Hansard reporter only heard one very everyone quoted two being said.

Thenorthend ref 19.17 post I assume you realise that as an Interested Party in the JR HARL is under no obligation to file any statements. Indeed they are under no obligation to take any part in the proceedings. It follows that contrary to what you say Islandmagee Energy did not fail to file anything late.

This from the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63547568