Member Info for stokey12

Si_Derman ref 11.38 post I would largelyn agree with you. My take is that the difference between these regulatory notices and a TR1 is that a TR1 is supposed to be given when you hold 3% or more of stock while these notices are triggered at 1%. See the link to the explainer that was posted I think on Friday. So we should see more people filing regulatory over the next couple of weeks.

Si_Derman ref 09.00 post I did a cross check between Vesselfinder and the Belfast Harbour websites and Belfast Harbour has it arriving tomorrow and vesselfinder has it as currently moored in Dublin. I assume that for some reason ithas had to extend its stay in Dublin.

I see from the RNS that a short position was taken. Would I be right in thinking that this was probably done on behalf of another client of Cavendish.

Si_Derman ref 08.42 post Epsilion is a ro-ro ferry not a cruise ship so if Scarman was being specific then no as it is not a cruise ship. However it may be that he was being generic and meant eithher a ferry or a cruise ship. As an aside I note thag it is in for a 10 day berth.

We have the Mello event tomorrow. Those of you that have more knowledge of Mello than me can I ask are the people who are likely to attend the event more likely to invest if the finance deal is signed prior to the meeting? Speaking personally I would be more likely to invest ina company who have a guarantee in relation to lending than one that does not.

Cgmarmion ref 20.54 post Thanks for the link I have some observations on the document at the link. Firstly, it is stated that HARL does not need any third party funding. This would imply that HARL will be using internal funds for this acquisition as such it seems to lay to rest any question around cashflow.

Secondly one concern I have is that it states that HARL's revenues for FY23 will be within the range £80m-100m. Current revenue guidance is for FY23 revenues will be £100m and not a range. In view of what happened last year and the effect it had on the share price if HARL was to miss the guidance figure a failure to meet guidance would cast doubt on the BoD's competence.

Finally, the offer price is £4,599,18 this is less than the net assets value of £7.897m but almost double the profit for FY22 which was £2.357m. Valuing private companies is not always easy as they are as far as I am aware not regulated or traded on any recognised exchange. That said I would think that if HARL was to increase its offer it may succeed in the acquisition.

LSE03 ref 17.54 post I am not sure that a shipyard has been appointed yet as the contract appear to be a FEED contract and they miht want to do the FEED first before engaging a shipyard manly because they may not know the full scope of work until then. I note the reference to regulatory issues which might delay the employment of a shipyard.

I do note they are in Aberdeen so it maybe that they have engaged in preliminary discussions with H+W Technology who are based in Aberdeen. Also with the work on the SeaRose next year HARL will have very recent experience of doing a Life Extension. So it might end up with Belfast.

Broomtree ref 17.10 post Thanks you saved me from havin to look for this information. I see where I got the 10% from.

NigelHaemoglobin ref 17.37 post I do not see either happening subject to one caveat and as I am not sure it is likely I will not explain it unless it happens. My view is that cashflow is not an issue as some of the contracts in particular the recent Cory contract would not have been entered into had that been the case.

Kaeren ref 16.46 post while your explanation might be techncally correct I have observed that where a share proce goes up by 10% they get a proce momitoring extension. Where the share priece goes up by around 20% they are forced to make a statement to then market as to whether there is a reason fro the rise as far as they knew. I as referin to the first situation as a speeding ticket.

Bubble2021 ref 15.16 post I am not sure that is correct. HARL has until 21 December to decide whether to make a formal offer. So we will not see an end on 21 December. I would not be surprised if we do not get a resolution until Q1 2024.

As HARL is now over 10% on the day are we going to see a sppeding ticket.

Si_Derman and SYN00GOLD Thanks this should smoke out all those who have not filed TR1s. But if they did not file TR1s will they file these forms.

Calling this incompetent would be an uderstatement n my opinion. Some of the vessels are on their last legs so if they are not replaced soon then the islanders will have problems. If the Scottish Government were to do a genuine procurement exercise I am not sure that Fergusons would win the contracts. I am also sure HARL would bid. The question is how the procurement will be designed are we goin to see the vessels split into lots. If that was to be done then you can possibly get the vessels built quicker using more than one shipyard.

There is this story from the FT https://www.ft.com/content/ab28e46c-5953-498c-b1f6-24ea0e404ac3. Interestingly the article has a rather abrupt end.

MickeyMasters ref 16.12 post why is that any different from IOSSC who currently have a monopoly on ferries to and from the Isles of Scilly and will need the fares income to service the loan to build the new ferries. I would observe that the assumption on affordability of the loan appears to be wrong as it is based on an interest rate of 5% when the current interest rate is 5.25%.

MickeyMasters ref 14.52 post I note that there is some dissatisfaction with IOSSC in particular around not giving refunds when passengers are moved onto the ferry because the plane cannot fly. This is even though the plane is more expensive than the ferry. But there is a more fundamental problem IOSSC have done calculations of the affordability of the loan to build the new ferries on the assumption that interest rates will be 5%. Interest rates are currently 5.25% and it is not clear when they will go back down.

In relation to the shareholders there are around 800 shareholders so it would be interesting to see how many do accept the offer if one is made.

LSE03 please ignore my 13.22 post

LSE03 ref 13.19 post Do you have more informaton/link for this?

Computer909 ref 10.51 if all they wanted to do is reduce the number of shares in issue was to consolidate the shares by a 100 to 1 consolidation. Instead you have the rather complicated scheme in the RNS. You say 'The important thing is your proportional holding/ voting rights is maintained.' but your voting rights are not maintained. No voting rights attach to the deferred shares.