Member Info for stokey12

Consuela ref 07.20 post The value in IM is in the Marine License. If you read the license you will see that the license can only be terminated on a 25 year notice and the notice cannot be given for 25 years giving an effective 25 year license. In the current circumstances HARL could sell the license on a projected earnings basis for more than the current MCap. As far as the JR is concerned I do not see that as an impediment as undertakings can be given in case the JR succeeds. Even in the unlikely event that the JR was to succeed the Minister will only be told to reconsider the matter. It is quite possible to reconsider the matter and come to the same conclusion.

I think that we may see a tie up with the project at Ballyumford which may impact on the project economics as well as the ecological concerns.

What I found interesting about the RNS is that while I believe EQT's functional currency is the euro the payments are expressed to be in GBP. This means that when the payments are converted into euros EQT will make about an additional 18% on the amount paid. I cannot remember what the original agreement said about ongoing charges for the provision of services but if this can be completed this would be good news.

Si_Derman ref 18.25 post I am only a suspected troublemaker it has never been proved to the criminal standard.

Pokerchips ref 13.52 post they need to do something as there are likely to be some questions especially if another significant loss is posted. Hopefully they will say something about the new Fishing Vessel service that was launched last week.

I would be more concerned if there is no information on IslandMagee in the Annual Report and Accounts,

oldtramp ref 13.07 post This of course depends on your definition of very close. Is it the same as when they something will happen in a few weeks? When it comes to the timing of events the BoD has zero credibility with me.

Jabido ref 10.52 post I think that in this instance the trading statement is accurate. The steel was coming from Asia I believe and by the time it arrived it needed remedial work done to it which delayed matters. I am a bit concerned though as I thought the contract provided for monthly payments from August so I do not see why this would have affected the payments. As I recall the payments by Saipem were not milestone payments. I presume this was altered for some reason or to reflect the longer time to complete the contract.

About the only positive in the statement is where it states 'Finally, Harland & Wolff (Arnish) has been busy with the contract that it signed last year and continues its fabrication at pace. Additionally, Harland & Wolff (Arnish) has signed an additional contract along with a variation to its existing contract that extends its scope and works, ' Had they stated the contract value of the variation I would have been worried as that is normally an indicator of a placing. It would have been nice to have more information on this to balance out the negative of the revenue deferral.

typo in my 10.19 post it should be next month.

I note that this was made intra day. I also note that the results will be net month. It is rather depressing to read that contracts will be the next few weeks there is only so many times that can be said before it loses veracity. In this regard I note that JW in his comment says the contracts are in Q2. On the whole I am not reassured by the trading statement.

oldtramp ref 09.32 post unfortunately you need to register to book. So I have to hope that some one who does attend can feedback what they learn.

For those going to this there is a drinks meet up on the 18 May from 7pm at the Seagate Hotel. Who will be going?

Si_Derman thanks for your 08.40 post so it is more than just an oil change. I wonder how much it is costing to repair.

oldtramp ref 08.10 post I wonder whether it is in port for repairs or whether the channels are being dredged for some reason.

Chrisatrdg ref 20.31 post yes I saw that I thought it was slightly disingenuous as Pharos simply moved from SRQ to BDD so was technically already berthed at Belfast. I did not make a point of it because the post would have been deleted and the two were in dry dock.

Stena Horizon is now berthed in BDD alongside Pharos due to leave 16 April 2022 the day after Pharos is due too leave BDD on 15 April. Dates subject to change.

Now that he has got to 5% will he stop buying or increase further. I wonder what his motivation is and what type of shareholder he will be.

This RNS leaves a couple of questions unanswered. Firstly, why is there a need for the initial drawdown so soon after the agreement being signed. It would seem to imply that EQT may have a temporary liquidity issue. Secondly, we have that performance agreement. If I am reading it correctly if the loan has not been repaid by 29 June then a performance fee would be paid if the share price reaches a certain amount.

In answer to muldoon96's 07.09 post I do not think so.

Based on this article which month do you expect the energy strategy to be published. I am being brave and saying June. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60903879

oldtramp ref 18.55 post Pharos is a shift from SRQ and when I checked earlier Stena Horizon was not showing I wonder if it is an emergency docking?