Harland & Wolff Share Discussion Threads

[linesal2] 25/1/2024 23:09

Maybe I am mistaken but was expecting a contract for MOD border boats...

[john mcinnes wood] 22/1/2024 12:17

linesal2 - 17th Jan 2024 - 'something to smack the shorting idiots to be announced within the next 5 days'. You really should stop swirling those tealeaves around.

[loglorry1] 18/1/2024 21:11

So much for Grant Shapps helping HARL then?

I suppose we'll see an RNS in the morning although maybe JW won't bother and just pivot to something else.

[jaknife] 18/1/2024 19:10

Is this what you refer to?

[john mcinnes wood] 18/1/2024 18:45

linesal2 - Announced today ISSG have signed contracts with Piriou for new vessels, bang goes the levelling up funding that HARL craved. JW out of his depth in taking on an established ferry company, best sticking to making floating skips (Cory barges).

[john mcinnes wood] 18/1/2024 01:44

RamLamb is having a break in Australia. He reads the odd comment on here.

[linesal2] 17/1/2024 17:27

Something to smack the shorting idiots to be announced (within the next 5 days I would say), Ram Lamb seems to have got the memo and gone (fair play), I would rather see the remaining idiots lose everything,

[seagreen] 17/1/2024 09:10

looking like a safe/strategic sector to me backed by MOD contracts etc

[loglorry1] 16/1/2024 15:05

Quick someone tell SuperDry they can get free gov backed loans really cheap hxxps://news.sky.com/story/struggling-superdry-hires-pwc-to-review-debt-options-13049611

[seagreen] 15/1/2024 22:10

Seems odd to be shorting for another penny to close ones short whent the upside could be many multiples or perhaps it is a desire to self promote his selections on that rag he contributes to?

Looks like the sorry trouble in the Red Sea could even make Harland even busier in the future ,,,,or even a strategic asset of great value to shareholders?

Karma is a wonderful thing ...ching ching

[xenor] 15/1/2024 11:04

Are you seriously shorting this without any understanding of the finance deal HARL is working on? It sounds like you are just reading JakNife's blog and throwing good money at it without doing any research.The government is NOT going to be lending HARL any money. The UKEF guarantee is not a loan from the government. It's a guarantee to commercial lenders who will provide the money at no risk to themselves (100% guaranteed).Please try harder. At least JakNife pretends to know what he's talking about with his shower of negativity.

[jaknife] 15/1/2024 10:44

The issue with the banks was that they were too big to fail so they couldn't be left to descend into insolvency. But did the government really "bail out" shareholders? Government put fresh money in at super low share prices, which recapitalised the businesses but shareholders were still sat on thumping losses (and still are to this day).

*IF* the government did the same here then the equivalent would be to put fresh equity in at say 10p a share. But HARL is technically insolvent as at 31 Dec 2023 by about £95m (it was c. £80m at 30 June 2023 and they were forecast to lose £15m in H2). To repair the balance sheet the government would need to subscribe for at least 950m shares at 10p each! And that would make the Government an 85% shareholder!

But the day after that money arrived HARL are proposing to send all of it to Riverstone to pay them off! So it would be Riverstone that would be getting bailed out! And then where's the cash that HARL would need for working capital?

If the best case scenario for shareholders is a 10p bail out by the Government then that's not exactly a compelling investment story!

JakNife

[loglorry1] 15/1/2024 09:01

Lloyds shareholders were diluted to oblivion and systemic banks are totally different from tiny engineering firms. Lloyds/RBS could not be put into administration without it absolutely devastating the UK economy AND more importantly there was no private solution available. The debt holders in RBS/Lloyds could not be written down under the legislation that existed then (it is different now) and so the Gov was forced to take a large equity stake. Even then there was no upside for existing equity as it was heavily diluted at a very low share price. They did avoid wipe out though.

Above all though the Gov has a private solution it can just allow the market to work and HARL to do a recap. This is what goes on every day across all the thousands of businesses in the world.

Backing a loan (esp 100%) is the same as giving them money. It effectively shifts the liability on their balance sheet.

[linesal2] 15/1/2024 00:29

so bailing Lloyds et al was not taxpayer's money?
HARL does not want money from the government just their backing which they seem to have.
Keep your brown trousers close to hand.

[linesal2] 15/1/2024 00:26

Governments don't run countries anymore they just try to win votes.

[loglorry1] 14/1/2024 12:50

Why do bulls think the bears are saying Harl might not complete the contracts for the MoD? Nobody is saying that. To complete them needs financing. The question is who will provide it and take the considerable risk associated with the projects.

It's ridiculously naive to go from there is unrest in the Red Sea to the government will bail out equity holders (and Riverstone).

Riverstone could request repayment in April and when it's not forthcoming take all the assets along with contracts ie all of HARL and sell it to new owners. These new owners could then complete the projects providing necessary financing if they deem the contracts worthwhile.

Riverstone could also take all the equity by swapping (some of)their debt to equity and inject more debt funding for working capital.

There's no history of the MoD ie the tax payer bailing out failed equity holders ever. It's just not how capitalism works and nor should it. Why should we cut cancer care in the NHS so that private investors who hold HARL shares are made whole after making a bad investment? Why should Riverstone get paid back by cutting nurses jobs? They willingly took the risk and have the company as security. Riverstone didn't expect HMG to back their lending.

[linesal2] 14/1/2024 09:40

Well with the red sea issues, the Royal Navy and its current and future fleet are very in Vogue, It would be catastrophic for the government if it were to come out HARL was not going to build the ships so IMHO, hence I see the financing as a formality. we will shortly find out.

[dudishes] 14/1/2024 03:15

Xenor,

Yep, revenue is cash, so you sort of agree with JakNife?

This donkey is being denied of feed.

No responce to your delves into shareprophets and EB contribution?

Shame, it is your money to lose afterall, very brave.

[xenor] 14/1/2024 01:20

Revenue is cash. The cost of servicing the debt will certainly be factored into the cost of doing business and the revenue we need to make from each contract, just as the costs of paying staff will be too. You don't take on a loan if you don't think you will be earning enough to service it, just as you wouldn't wirh your mortgage.Your claim that the 2024 loss will be higher because of a revenue downgrade for 2023 is also bending the truth. If those revenues can't be booked in 2023 then I expect them to be booked in 2024 with a revenue guidance upgrade. Let's see what happens there. Admittedly JW has in the past used deferred revenue as part of the following year's guidance, which I disagree with. I would like to see a business update with revenues for 2023, what has been deferred and updated guidance for 2024.I'm also going to dismiss that inside information you have on the Riverstone loan being due April 2024 because the latest RNS (half year report in September) that we have that mentions this clearly states end of 2024. Either you have inside information and the RNS is wrong, or the RNS is correct. It's irrelevant anyway as the company can extend the loan due date into 2025.I care very little about the Riverstone loan to be honest. I expect the new finance deal to close, Riverstone to be paid off from half of the funds and the new loan to have payment terms into 2029. By 2029 the company will be bringing in over 500m revenue per year. A 200m loan isn't very big at that point, and there's nothing to stop the company from refinancing again in a few years or extending terms if it hasn't paid it all off.The idea that this loan has to be paid off in full anytime soon is a myth perpetuated by those dreaming of the company going bust.

[dudishes] 12/1/2024 16:16

HARL transcripts on Shareprophets website since the first "Zero" prediction by TW on
1 July 2023.

Tim W 9 updates

Evil Banksta 2 analytic views.

All Blogs fully intact and there for you to read.

Xenor.

It seems that you did not look very far, or more to the point, you give the impression that you have access to the site.

I claim that you do not and by insinuation you are making false claims.

Porkies are naughty.

cheers

[jaknife] 12/1/2024 15:59

Xenor,

"Think the most likely scenario is that we pay the debt back with future revenue, ie the whole point of taking a loan."

No! No! No!

You do NOT pay back loans with revenue!

1. Loans are repaid with cash.

2. Loans are repaid with NET cash - revenue, less costs of goods, less admin costs, less finance costs, less tax, etc. Which is most closely approximated to with a measure called post-tax profits!

And the house broker's forecasts for 2024 is post-tax profits of -£24m (a loss) and that net debt at year-end will be £144m! (Although these figures were before HARL's end of November profit warning and hence materially out of date.)

There is not a hope in hell that HARL will have generated adequate excess cash by the end of 2024 (or by April 2024 when Riverstone have the right to call for early repayment) to repay the loan and on that basis the idea that HARL will "pay the debt back with future revenue" is for the fairies.

JakNife

[loglorry1] 12/1/2024 15:55

Debts can be repaid back from post tax profits not from revenues. You need to understand the differences between revenues and profits. HARL makes no profits nor is it forecast to.

[xenor] 12/1/2024 14:38

Or the fairies could swoop in and drop pallets of £50 notes. Or maybe even Elon Musk could pay it for us? Any other scenarios you can think of?Think the most likely scenario is that we pay the debt back with future revenue, ie the whole point of taking a loan.I take it you've never had a mortgage.

[loglorry1] 12/1/2024 13:21

"I'm glad you understand the concept of a loan, that it has to be paid back."
Or converted to equity or the company goes into admin. Riverstone basically own all of HARL unless they can get the refi done.