Member Info for stokey12

Nobby31 ref 12.47 post I agree with you in part. While I agree that IM as a project should be delivered by people with experience of running a gas cavern project I disagree that would require an outright sale. I wonder why you do not think a buy and operate lease for say 30 years would not bring better value than an outright sale?

Iamsailing ref 14.15 post my suggestion with regards to fabrication is not based on the status quo. Rather it is based on the proposition that HARL is awarded a number of contracts in relation to windfarms. If the number and value of these contracts are significant then they can be used to leverage funds to upgrade the yards.

Si_Derman ref 09.40 post Take your point but it would be inconsistent with her recent LinkedIn post which referenced energy security which would support the keeping of IM.

Avyererdowt ref 08.49 post I am not experienced at company valuations. I would say that there is currently insufficient information to make a guess of a valuation based on contracts. That said I would expect the valuation on the basis of value of contracts to be multiplies of the current MCap.

I was thinking there is another possible explanation for the recent NED appointment. As some of us might recall the Saipem 1 contract was for £26m to construct 8 wind jackets. With all the windfarm developments around the UK Coast HARL might create a subsidiary to hold all the fabrication contracts. Then private equity/Sovereign Wealth Funds could be sold equity in that company with the proceeds being used to upgrade and modernise the yards.

Si_Derman ref 12.57 post The Quorn is the one that is being refurbished and the Atherstone is the one that was acquired with a view to it being converted as per client's instructions and sold. Hopefully at a good profit.

Looks like Arnish has a very good satisfied customer https://www.stornowaygazette.co.uk/business/nuclear-imperative-gives-boost-to-arnish-3801251

RoughStorage ref 09.24 this seems like a visit for a specific purpose so I do ot think discussions will be had on any other topic.

Si_Derman ref Tuesday 19.06 post JW has posted on LinkedIn which I have seen on my phone so I cannot copy and paste that the Quorn has a reported ETA at Appledore of 07.00 hours on the 14.

Chrisatrdg ref 13.39 post perhaps HARL might want to do a post similar to my Tue 15:14 post showing how it will be increasing the volume and diversity of its work leading to it starting to be profitable in xxxx. It might help if they had upto date presentations on its website.

On checking the Belfast Harbour website I noticed that there are entries for the LOCHMADDY CAISSON PROJECT it is showing as moving at 01.00 on the 15 August from BBD to OQ before moving to SRQ at 12.00. I cannot find any entry of its arrival at BBD. I am not sure if it is related to this https://www.publiccontractsscotland.gov.uk/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAR410303. I would expect an RNS soon on this.

Nobby31 ref 11.28 post my view is that there are a number of developments over the next two years that individually or cumulatively might be transformational for HARL. Not necessarily in order I believe they are:-

SeaRose FPSO Drydocking. - Although the drydocking is not due to occur until 2024 the tender is out apparently with a six week turnaround. HARL did the 2012 drydocking for this vessel and completed it two days early. So if HARL was to tender for this new drydocking then it must be favourite. This would be a 70 day drydocking. From information in the public domain it looks like the tender will be for a eight figure sum.

IslandMagee - I do not agree with Iamsailing that the appointment of the new NED automatically means that IslandMagee is being made ready for sale. In the current climate if asked I see HMG being willing to lend HARL the whole capital cost of the project in order to boost energy security. The recent LinkedIn post from the new NED on her joining the board does not read to me as if she will be joining the board to facilitate the disposal of IslandMagee.

FSS - The decision on this is due by Q4 with a contract to be signed by Q1 2023. Unlike Jabido I am not convinced that HARL will definitely get any sub contracting work on this. This is based on comments made by the CEO of either BAe or BAB before the defence select committee. That said based on the recent Navy Outlook article I am reasonably optimistic on Team Resolute's chances.

Windfarm Developments - If we have not heard anything on this front by Q4 then I would start to get worried. I see this as a short term revenue enhancing project.

On the whole based on the above I concur with Jabido's comment in his 11.44 post 'By end of Q1 we will be smiling lots I'm sure'

RichardMcV ref 15.27 post Interesting read I note it says that they can guarantee work for at least two years. Clearly they are expecting more than just the Cory contract then. I personally would not count on the FSS work just yet as that depends on who wins the tender.

Chitta123 ref 09.07 post what do you base your prediction on?

Si_Derman ref 21.11 post you have a point there.Just read the article again and it is too late to add their five tests as the bids have already gone in. Therefore, unless the questions were already in the tender questions and part of the scoring they cannot be used. Generally on the bids 20% of the bid score is based on price. As I understand from the Navy Lookout article from last week none of the bids is within the £1.67bn budget. So none of the bids are likely to score the full 20%. The bid nearest to the budget will get the highest score on that element. From the same article it would seem that would not be Team UK. I am not sure of the weighting given to it but another of the criteria is deliverability.
I believe it was previously stated that 30% was to come from social value. It is not clear how this is going to be measured but it has to be done objectively.

My impression is that these three might be Team UK's weakest areas. The question is whether Team Resolute can score better than Team UK.

LSE03 The unions seem concerned that the Team UK bid will not be able to compete on price so are trying to exert political pressure to award a contract which may not be good value for money.

ref my 17.27 post of yesterday I have noticed that I forgot the link. Took a bit of finding but here it is https://www.cenovus.com/News-and-Stories/News-releases/2022/2452998

This is also worth a read I note the budget line for this and other works is around $500m. I wonder how much of that is for the 70 day drydock.

I just googled the vessel concerned and came across this https://www.harland-wolff.com/portfolio/searose-fpso/. This would give HARL a possible advantage.

Not my normal reading matter but this article might be of interest https://www.upstreamonline.com/exclusive/bid-battle-begins-for-fpso-dry-docking-contract/2-1-1273432. Possible work for 2024.