Member Info for stokey12

NigelHaemoglobin ref 14.29 post sorry I do not see a takeover as remotely likely. As I said the other week due to the range of services that HARL offers anyone taking over the whole company would end up with non core assets that they would need to maintain or dispose of. Also while £1.30 - £1.50 a share would represent fair value to a shareholder someone bidding would look at the MCap and would not in my opinion offer that much.

Consuela ref 12.48 post I still look for clarification and unlike you I do not assume anything.

Radders99 ref 12.02 post it shows the information source for the post and allows anyone who wants to to check that what I said is true. I try to avoid making conclusory statements which do not have a firm factual basis.

Si_Derman ref 10.00 post I have seen posts in the past about JW that suggested things like I found out this morning. Having learnt it I am not as I indictaed in my earlier posts overly concerned by this information. I would observe that the people on this board, and I suspect there are some, who are more closely conected to JW's former companies may not be so forgiving.

Si_Derman ref 08.00 post I found the existence of the second list more troubling as in all cases the companies were dissolved. What is not clear is why they were dissolved. There could be a number of reasons for a company to be dissolved. That said to have been a director of six companies that have been dissolved and not have been disqualified is a good indicator that there was no impropriety involved.

Further to my 05.09 post I have just come across this list https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/ARInXJbpERectvCLtDRdS0Il0I0/appointments . While more troubling I note in none of these cases did it lead to the Insolvency Service to apply for a Directors Disqualification Order.

Consuela ref 19.30 post two observations. Firstly, as I said to you before and you did not respond I look at the quality of the senior management and do they have the contacts and experience to carry out their jobs. They are doing the day to day work. Secondly, you are going back sixteen years I would be surprised if any CEO does not have at least failed company.

Also I note that on checking JW at companies house his list of directorhips shows only one dissolved company that was in 2018. See this link https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/Plcqu9fe3dy6V0i27ZoAhk8Feec/appointments There is no evidence of any Director Disqualification Orders I also checked here https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/search/disqualified-officers?q=John+MacInnes+Wood&page=6 and could fin nothing. This tells me that what ever you may think JW has never done anything that warranted being banned a company director.

Broomtree ref 11.16 post I was under the impression that the three FSS ships were to be done one after another but you seem to be implying they will be done altogeher.

There was some discussin yesterday about the question of capacity for HARL to do the FSS and Titanic II if it ges ahead. If you look at this page https://www.harland-wolff.com/facilities/belfast/ It would seem that the two may be able to be built side by side. I note what broomtree says about the facilities that were removed by Fred Olson when he was in charge. However if HARL was to bid I would expect them to have plans to deal with the issue.

Scaffman ref 17.6 post see this link https://www.google.com/search?q=aud+to+gbp&sca_esv=98989144458a5fc8&sxsrf=ACQVn08rHTqO_tQYyAVqPsAR4r1IJqlIvw%3A1710522495331&source=hp&ei=f4D0ZZHpEYPHhbIPi_O5gA0&iflsig=ANes7DEAAAAAZfSOj-uxEYKmgWe3ibwxuG8BhctQRxNH&oq=aud&gs_lp=Egdnd3Mtd2l6IgNhdWQqAggCMhAQABiABBiKBRhDGLEDGIMBMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMhAQABiABBiKBRhDGLEDGIMBMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgoQABiABBiKBRhDSLknUABYswhwAHgAkAEAmAGvAaABxQOqAQMwLjO4AQHIAQD4AQGYAgOgAoYEwgIKECMYgAQYigUYJ8ICFhAuGIAEGIoFGEMYsQMYgwEYxwEY0QPCAg0QABiABBiKBRhDGLEDwgIREC4YgAQYsQMYgwEYxwEY0QPCAgsQABiABBixAxiDAcICCxAuGIAEGMcBGNEDmAMAkgcDMC4zoAejGg&sclient=gws-wiz

It is probably me being thic but what does directors quitting have to do with replacing ferries?

Broomtree ref 10.16 post When you look at the available shipyard capacity worldwide then you will see that there are only about three shipyard companies that would have then drydock capacity to do the work including HARL. Mr Cameron has said that he does not want to go to the far east that knocks out the majority of drydocks of suitable size if I recall correctly. The only issue I have is whether then beam in the main dock is wide enough to take both a FSS ship and Titanic II. I know from a previous year when we had eight or nine ships berthed in Belfast that HARL can take more than one ship in a dock at a time. So I would say that it is doable with proper planning

I have just checked the dimensions and the main dock can comfortably handle the dimensions. As Mr Plamer has indicated it will be a European shipyard this will reduce the number of yards that can do the build.

I do not think money will be much of a problem for him. while he might not need the UKEF funding I am sure that might help persuade him. Plus the idea of the same shipping company to build the replacement might be intersting.

Lottie123 ref 07.51 post I am not sure that restricting the supply of HARL shares by a share buyback programme would be of much affect. It would in my opinion be of use if there is a demand for shares. I note that earlier this week there was a comment that some institutional investorsare holding back pending the resolution of the new debt facility. If that is the case then a share buyback programme in advance of the new debt facility is unlikely to help.

While the cost of any buyback at the current share price would not cost much I would not support a buyback unless there is clear evidence of effectiveness.

Lottie23 ref my 18.29 post see the report on this link https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9764/ I am not sure how a programme that is so far behind its original service date can be acceleration.

Lottie123 As far as I can see not mentioned in the article is the reason for this acceleration of the process. Google Ajax Tank. As an alternative do a search on the Parliament website for questions on Ajax you will need to go back to January 2020 though.

Si_Derman ref 15.56 post I could be wrong but if you look at the job functions it reads to me that they may be a technical evaluation team. This would seems to be reinforced by this comment on the post 'and discussed future building and ship repair projects.' That would seem to me to be the kind of discussion who had practical knowledge. As I said could be wrong.

Ref my 16.39 post the link to the post is https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7174067079292055553/

Just seen this

Daniel Fearnley Following Director of Energy

52m • Edited •

Looking forward to attending #windeurope2024 next week in Bilbao and discussing Harland & Wolff's continued efforts to drive this incredible market. Please reach out to discuss #offshorewind #floatingoffshorewind #shipbuilding.

I noe he says continued efforts.