Member Info for Unininaninimity

Quote from RR:

"The new structure will create a more agile business that is better able to serve customers and continue to create and maintain world-class products. It will help Rolls-Royce build enhanced capabilities in key areas such as procurement and supply chain management, ensuring they are as strong as the company's engineering and technical excellence."

And you achieve this by getting rid of some of the people who help deliver this?

Nah, I don't think so. Its just marketing gloss to hide the fact that they just want to pay themselves more money. IMHO.

Just to add, when I say that this relates only to a small number of people, I'm referring to the people who are being made redundant, not the overall workforce.

Also, as you say, (and apart from these just mentioned), they will already have decided which roles are to be targetted for redundancy. The vast majority of the people involved will not be under-performing, in fact, probably just the opposite.

Knivey: it is true that companies use these occasions to get rid of under-performing staff. From experience, I would say that this only relates to a small number of people. I think that most of these will recognise that they've been found out and leave peacefully. However, in my opinion, this is not the correct way to deal with under-performing staff: they should be dealt with under the disciplinary system and given the opportunity to improve. There are suitable means to deal with this, and making them redundant in this way I would think is illegal. But the big boys just bully their way through this. This is part of the dark side of Capitalism.

As I predicted previously, the hatchet men arrive.

There is a risk of inadvertently losing staff with specialised experience and then this comes back to bite you further down the line. There is also an increased risk of mental health issues due to overloading staff with work duties that would previously have been done by the staff who have been fired.

This will all be covered with a thick coat of marketing gloss, no doubt.

Do they mention what the massive cost of making these redundancies will be?

Is that a possible £4m loss, or have I got the decimal point in the wrong place again?

It looks like Systematica have closed their short position.

Paid trolls: you don't hear from them for months and then suddenly, on a price rise, they appear out of nowhere.

They should be banned from the forums.

Was he negotiating a pyramid selling scheme?

Don't forget that this company set off on its current course at the worst possible time for a fledgling company: right in the heart of the Covid pandemic. I wasn't sure if it would survive, to be honest. Its back in now with a fighting chance, I think, thanks to the work of Callum and others, and the continued support of shareholders.

Hence, Systematica in profit on their short position.

Longer-term, we are confident that our diversified strategy will continue to deliver significant value for shareholders, with our investment in new content verticals and capabilities underpinning our growth ambitions.

Looks like I've hit a sore point there Kat. Are you a paid ramper/deramper then?

There is a distinction, because paid rampers/derampers are not expressing an honest opinion, but are deliberately posting biased information according to the dictates of the company involved.

Pretty stupid and asenine of you to think otherwise, isn't it?

About a year ago, I found a paid ramper who was jumping around various forums posting ramping messages. So far, I haven't outed any paid derampers, but you can be sure that they are here.

Recently, many hedge fund managers had to reduce positions due to the sharp rise in UK indices. You can bet they pay good money to companies who have people posting negatively on these forums.

I think that this type of posting should be banned.

It is basically fraud and the hedge funds profit at the expense of the average punter. Sharp practice or fraud: what do you think?

About a year ago, I found a paid ramper who was jumping around various forums posting ramping messages. So far, I haven't outed any paid derampers, but you can be sure that they are here.

Recently, many hedge fund managers had to reduce positions due to the sharp rise in UK indices. You can bet they pay good money to companies who have people posting negatively on these forums.

I think that this type of posting should be banned.

It is basically fraud and the hedge funds profit at the expense of the average punter. Sharp practice or fraud: what do you think?

Maybe they're trying to lose money to reduce their tax bill. Who knows.

Funny that these people appear now, but where were they when the share price was 2p?

Nowhere to be seen.

By the way, I've asked LSE what their policy is regarding paid posters. That is, posters who get paid by companies to either ramp or de-ramp a company. Do they get banned if discovered to be receiving payments for posts?

Same for TROLLS. Do they get banned if discovered? Will see what they have to say.

Take "Critical Metal" for instance. NO income.

I appreciate input where this is genuine.

PAID posters and clever but detractive TROLLS are not welcome here.

Come on Guys, play nice! It is clear that the company is heading in the right direction.

The figures for the Return on Capital Employed uphold this view.

Income is disappointing, but at least there IS an income and it is heading in the right direction.

This is more than can be said for other companies that are being invested in by some of the characters here (put your name here if the cap fits!).

Luv and peace, Hank.

Just to let you know, the missing short transaction has mysteriously appeared in today's FCA report, at number 73 in the chart.