Member Info for stokey12

This post was on LinkedIn

'Today, we’re celebrating.

On this day four years ago, under new ownership and management, we began to write the next chapter our maritime history. Starting out from our famous site in Belfast, today Harland & Wolff is at work across the UK with delivery centres in Arnish, Methil and Appledore, and also internationally in the USA.

With the support of our 1,000-strong crew, we’re meeting the challenges of our clients in commercial, cruise and ferry, defence, energy and renewables – with fresh thinking, daring ingenuity and agility.

Our vision is bold. Our plans are big. Our journey is just getting going. Speak to the Harland & Wolff team today to discover how we can support you to design, fabricate, repair, refit and maintain your maritime assets. '

I have just seen this from UK Defence Journal via a link on its twitter feed https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/concern-over-funding-of-new-royal-navy-destroyers/. The twitter feed which some might want to read can be found here https://twitter.com/UKDefJournal/status/1731721081000444315 some of the unfunded items are things which HARL msy want to bid for.

The 2023 Accounts can be found here https://investor.austal.com/static-files/ed74d245-eece-45b5-9fd4-7c07a766585a this shows that at year end that Total Comprehensive Income for the year was $51m which was significantly down on 2022 when it was $175m. Both figures have been rounded down. Total Net Assets were up at $948m from $924m. So I do not think the financial position is as it may seem from recent articles the links to which have been posted on this thread. My read is that the losses are due to the cost of setting up the steel hulled vessels. We would need to wait until the 2024 Accounts to see if that is the case.

Scaffman ref 16.27 post It is not that easy. The council want to access the LuF money to build the new vessels as this would help keep the fare increases down as there would be no loan repayments. In order to do this the running of the ferry service would have to go out to tender to satisfy DfT requirements. The Steamship Company it seems does not aree to this hence the seeking of the loan to build the new vessels.

Scaffmanref 14.52 post I am not able to give any detailed insight. To get a detailled insight you would need to google Ferguson Marine. But what I do know is that Fergusons got into finanical difficulties and as they were the last commercial Scottish shipyard the then SNP government nationalised it to save jobs. CMAL the body that owns the ferries and is itself a nationalised company engaged Fergusons to build two ferries. It is not clear how Fergusons came to be awarded the tender. The ferries are still not fully built and the costs have escalated.

The Scottish Auditor has published some reports which have not been very good reading for the SNP government. Currently Fergusons is maintained in business by government loans. If as they say that there are doubts that it can remain a going concern then it is questionable if the SNP government could legally make a direct award to them. In that case HARL's chances of getting some of the contracts would be improved.

Broomtree ref 07.03 post I am surprised at you. You should know that they are NOT TR1s. They are notifications under the takeover code.

I have just seen this on LinkedIn which was liked by Ben Murray. It shows that HARL seems to be forgig ties with Lbour.

Progressive BritainProgressive Britain Political OrganizationsPolitical Organizations

Welcome to our first tranche of Corporate Forum partners Harland & Wolff Primera Corporation Limited Trust Alliance Group Heathrow City of London Corporation Amazon Web Services (AWS) - we look forward to working with you over the next year!

Delighted to have hosted our first Corporate Forum round-table event last week expertly chaired by Emily Wallace. We were pleased to be joined by Darren Jones MP, Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury who shared insight and analysis on the recent Autumn Statement, alongside Lord Roger Liddle, Dr. Jeevun Sandher and Daniel Tomlinson.

An interesting cross-sector conversation followed looking at many of the current challenges being faced and the opportunities and solutions being identified by a potential Labour government.

Thanks for your contributions Daniel Platt Tijs Broeke Andrew Dowler Ben Murray David Pilling James North Mitchell Simmons

Adam Langleben Thomas Collinge and for organising Roberta Henry

John Midgley Kristy Sandino

Want to join our next event? Get in touch with Roberta Henry to find out more about our Partnership Opportunities:

Corporate Forum - year-round partnership

Progressive Britain annual conference

Progressive Britain at the Labour Party Conference 2024

Bespoke opportunities also available.

https://lnkd.in/eXijT9gU

AimMaster2018 ref 15.15 post I am not sure who you were aiming your post at as three different people have posted on this thread. I would caution against taking everything at face value. For instance every year we are told how cruise ship repairs are done in Q4/Q1 yet ever since I have been invested I have not seen evidence of significant cruise ship dockings in this period.

Boomtree ref 13.41 post I agree with you as it relates to FSS but you will recall that HARL was nominated at the Cruise Ship Interiors Awards for the idea of Belfast becoming a centre of excellence for cruise ship repair. done much of I must say I found that interesting as cruise ship repair is something HARL has not done much of so I cannot see how that will progress without increasing signifcantly the number of cruise ships arriving for repair or refit.

Broomtree ref 12.59 post You have to remember especially with MoD contracts that the maintenance is tendered separately. You will note that with the £1bn 10 year RFA maintenance contract none of the lots went to the contractors that built the ships. I would have thought that the machinery used to build ships would also be needed to do repairs and refits.

I wonder whether it would be easier for HARL to concentrate on ship repair and maintence. These contracts are multi year contracts so HARL would have a secure tream of income. So long as HARL manages to them right they should be profitable. The RFA maintenace contracts need to be renewed. In addition the maintenace contract for FSS will be due not long after.

Just seen this on LinkedIn. As HARL wants to start a new fast ferry service this might be of interest. The text of the post is

'Electrifying + lengthening + autonomous battery-changing robot

The high-speed ferries BARONESSEN and BARONEN returned to the Brødrene Aa shipyard to replace their diesel engines with batteries. The vessels will also be lengthened by 10m to address the reduced energy efficiency due to the addition of heavy batteries.

Innovation in charging: with the assistance of a robotic arm and a battery carousel, the battery module can be replaced in approximately 3 minutes. SHIFTR enables a swift transition to a fully charged battery while the boat is docked, resulting in significant time savings.

Article and photos by the shipyard: https://lnkd.in/ehH8etMM'

I find it interesting that they have lengthen the ferries.

LSE03 ref 10.02 post thanks do BAB will build the T31s and this contract is to maintain and repair the T31s for upto 10 years assuming that the two extensions are granted. One thing of interest I noted is this 'The contracting authority/entity may oblige the successful tenderer to award all or certain subcontracts.' Any idea why this has been put in?

Bubble2021 ref 08.29 post The details of the contractmis as far as I am aware not in the public domain. However, I believe that the then Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, was a proponent of fixed term contracts so I do not think there would be much in the way of flexibility on price. That said the main manufacture contract did allow for adjustment to account for inflation. I also believe that a similar provision is in place in the contract between HARL and Navantia but those details are also not in the public domain.

I have just come across this https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-07-14/194163. It looks like BAB has found the Type 31 contract a bit of a problem. I do not know what the issue is but I did read somewhere that they were complaining about an onerous condition. I can think of two possible conditions which might be considered onerous by them. One is a fixed costs condition so they would be obliged to deliver the contract for an agreed price. The other is a requirement that they deliver the contract by a specific date.

LSE03 ref 21.47 post do you have a link to this as I thought BAB were the contractors for this. I aso wonder if it is related to this https://www.naval-technology.com/news/type-31-frigate-programme-dispute-resolution-process-paused/.

I have just seen this article. I am not sure where Dogger Bank is but hopefully HARL can be positioned to get a slice of this investment. https://www.cityam.com/cop28-rishi-sunak-unveils-massive-11bn-deal-for-uks-dogger-bank-wind-farm/?utm_source=CityAM&utm_campaign=72750bba18-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2023_12_01_03_53&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-72750bba18-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

Consuela ref 12.27 post I was wondering if you would answer my question. Anyway my opinion remains that it is likely that at some stage you will see a planning application to store hydrogen at IM. I am not saying that HARL in its on right will be the first applicant for planning permisson to store hydrogen at IM. However, I do see hydrogen being stored at IM.

Bubble2021 ref 09.48 post If the appeal fails they can only have one final appeal and that would be to the UK Supreme Court. However such an appeal would need permission from the Supreme Court. Most applications for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court fail.

Consuela ref 08.57 post Assuming that you are refering to my 08.17 post can you explain why you say that it is a woefully inaccurate statement. The last sentence is not a statement of fact but opinion.