Member Info for stokey12

I need to do a full read but note a 65% increase in revenues and HARL traditionally backloads revenues.

HarChris ref 17.19 post there is insufficient information in my view for any guess being nything more than picking a number out of the air.

Caravan ref 16.00 post How far off HARL is to sustainable profits in my opinion cannot be judged until we see the H1 figures dye by the end of this month. If the H1 figures show that HARL is on course to meet the guidance firgure of £100m then we can expect that profits may be reached around FY24. With construction of FSS due in earnest in FY25 I would expect profits from then on.

Topofthecharts ref 15.30 post on or before 29 September.

Toli ref 15.07 post I do not think it has anything to do with manipulation. Do you have an idea of how many trades of under twenty shares a tade would be needed to affect the share price. I think you will find the transactions are from people using a no fee broker who can therefore afford to make these small trades.

LSE03 ref 12.12 post I note that the article does not ention either BAB or BAe which seems to acknowledge that they may not have the capacity to do the work.

LSE03 ref 09.45 post If I recall correctly I think JW is looking at taking part in the small vessel replacement programme. Politically speaking using HARL to build ferries would be a good idea.

LSE03 On the Stornoway Port Authority page it says ' It will provide a deep-water berth and laydown area adjacent to Arnish Fabrication Yard, operated by Harland & Wolff.'

LSE03 ref 08.35 post Marketing are having a busy two weeks. HARL are certainly raising their profile. In relation to Stornoway I have always assumed it is a joint offerl with Arnish doing the fabricating and Stornoway Port delivering the items to the site. Not an official JV but close to it.

Bridgedogg1 ref 07.50 post Thanks makes interesting reading. The ferry needs to be replaced by 2026 but they have not started on the construction. Would not surprise me if it gets to 2025 before they start building the ferry.

LSE03 ref 16.13 post I recall having a discussion with Consuela at the time the bill was going through over whether it was within the bank's remit to fund in whole or in part IM. I remain of the view that it is open to the Bank to fund IM. I suspect JW is of the same view.

Consuela firstly apologies for posting on the wrong thread butas it is a Sunday could not be bothered to find the right one. You asked about the basis of the £100m+ valuation for IM. If I may address that point by saying you may be looking at it the wrong way. You are looking at the current state of the land. With respect that is the wrong basis. The land as it stands has the benefit of a license to carry out works which will derive some benefit. So I would argue that it should be valued on the same basis as an empty field with planning permission for a 50 house development. The value of the development has to be added to the value of the land to get the value of the entire project.

In the case of IM you are looking at a field with the benefit of a license that will run for over forty years. On your point about the Utility Regulator while the Utility Regulator could say no I am inclined to the view that any concerns would be met by the imposition of conditions rather than a flat no. So taking the length of the license together with the possible revenue into account the £100m+ valuation would be about right.

LSE03 ref 11.15 post Things must be bad when even the Daily Mail does not support the appointment of a Defence Secretary. The problem is caused by only using BAe or BAB for repairs and building of the submarines. There will come a time when there is no space available.

HarChris ref 20.26 post I cannot see looking at HARL's history going back well beyond when I first invested here that to quote you 'Forget AIM machiavellianism, forget the many other possible reasons why the share price is where it is, number one without a shadow of a doubt is the debt risk in what is a high debt environment.' There are a number of rpossible reasons why the share price and there is no way of knowing which holds greater weight. In fact I doubt that the weight that is applied to each factor changes wityh who is doing the evaluation. I doubt that we have a uniformity of view of the type you appear to be suggesting.

HarChris ref 20.05 post I note that you seem totally unable to consider that you maybe wrong. Your response to my post which everyone should read was so positive that I was wrong in my concerns that a casual reader might think you were not just putting a counterpoint to my argument. I note that after the FSS announcement you were very offended when I suggestted that the share price might go down on no news. In fact if I recall you asked me to admit I was wrong. What did sbsequent events teach us?

Halfpenny ref 19.22 post When reading a UK Defence Journal article you need to keep in mind the pro scottish bias of UK Defence Journal. If memory serves one of the main journalist George Allison is a graduate of a Scottish University. His articles are generally quite good and well worth a read. That said you need to keep in mind that he has that bias. When he talks about Scottish shipyards he is referring to those own by BAe and BAB not HARL or anyone else.

As far as HARLs two Scottish sites are concerned they are likely to be more for fabrication than shipbuilding. Shipbuilding is more likely to be at Belfast or Appledore.

I have been off site due t technical problem not buying computer parts off ebay again. I was able to read posts though and what I found interesting is that some of the people who on Wednesday were telling me that I was wrong to express caution over a possible share price surge on JR news on Friday was saying that the share price would rise gradually. Some of them were also the same people who when I expressed a concern that after the FSS contract news the share price might trend down on no news said I was wrong. In both cases I was going on what happened before. What do we take from this? Where someone expresses a view based on past history which is not inline with the prevailing view do not assume they must be wrong and act accordingly.

LSE03 ref 15.14 post Thank you I was trying to remember what else was on that week. That is the same week as DESI2023 and LISW2023 which HARL is involved in. So a busy week for marketing.

Can be found on this link. https://www.judiciaryni.uk/judicial-decisions/summary-judgment-re-no-gas-caverns-ltd-and-friends-earth

MaryBri90 ref 11.49 post all quiet on their twitter feeds