Harland & Wolff Share Discussion Threads

[jaknife] 15/5/2024 15:11

The article and RNS read to me that:

1. The Times has an inside source at the top of government who has learnt that the application for the loan guarantee has been rejected.

Tick for the Times for getting the scoop - ie doing their job.

2. That news hasn't yet been formally communicated to John, or to the UKEF, and consequently both think that they are still "in discussions".

Other than that the RNS then blathers on about matters completely unrelated to the application for the loan guarantee.

JakNife

[loglorry1] 15/5/2024 15:09

Let's also look at what The Times article said and the RNS did not refute:

"Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, is expected to block a financial support package designed to keep the Harland & Wolff shipbuilding company in Belfast afloat, and government insiders have voiced serious fears that the 162-year-old firm could collapse as a result, marking the end of centuries of shipbuilding in the city."
(my bold)

The RNS could have said "The company has no knowledge of any steps taken by the Chancellor to block the financing and it proceeds as expected". Instead, we are told they are comfortable.

"Harland & Wolff is in possession of a £1.6 billion contract to construct Royal Navy ships. Its demise would mean that navy vessels could be built in the Spanish port of Cadiz."

I'd agree that this part is silly. The demise of H&W and I'm not sure if they mean wiping out the current shareholders or something else would not mean the ships are built in Cadiz.

"The loan guarantee was conditional on the company passing state-aid checks. However, a defence source said Hunt had given the go-ahead to officials this week to reject the company’s application. It was disputed by a government spokesman and the company, both of which said discussions were continuing on the export development guarantee."

Sort of agrees with the RNS that discussions are ongoing except for the part about Hunt's intention to block it but that's discussed above.

"Hunt and Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, have been in discussions over the future of the company in recent days, with one source saying there was a “row” between government departments."

I guess its the sort of row that makes HARL management remain "comfortable"?

"A Whitehall source insisted that the chancellor had “not blocked it yet” and the final decision was still to be made. " Again agrees with the RNS.

Then goes on to say all the ships will still be built in the UK regardless using some other method. No comment on that in the RNS.

[loglorry1] 15/5/2024 14:51

"Excellent response from the company. Looks like The Times article was highly speculative and suggestive. Ie BS"

Really! The response was uber weak. It started off saying that it refuted the claims in the article but then it basically agreed with it. Main points below:-

"The Company confirms that discussions continue to progress at pace on the EDG with all relevant Government departments and financial institutions; management remain comfortable with progress on what is a complex and large transaction for all parties involved. A further update will be provided in the next few weeks."

So discussions are ongoing. "Management are comfortable" means nothing can't take that to the bank. Standard RNS bs where you just say something that is vacuously true. Who knows how comfy JW is - probably very given his salary!

It then goes on to say

"Having won a large proportion of the prestigious Fleet Solid Support Programme in FY23... 5 Year plan.... Busy across 5 markets...."

All known.

"The Company continues to have highly supportive financial partners and shareholders who are aware of the long-term plan." Lenders have not pulled the plug so what? Shareholders - ok if you say so but I doubt they are really supportive.


"The Company made an application for the EDG product..." Yep we know and it has taken ages and ages.

"The Company remains comfortable with the progress of this application." Still comfortable whatever that means.

"the Company has in is portfolio, it has substantial capacity"... yep we know it has a nose bleed payroll, with 1500 ppl on it, to show for it but no finance to undertake such work.

Then we have comment from the Liar JW: "Our EDG application has not been rejected and continues to be work in progress."

That's what the Times article said.

What the RNS did not say:

"We expect the application to be granted"
"The specific claims A, B, C etc. made in The Times article are untrue".

The RNS said nothing at all that contradicted the Times article.

[papillon] 15/5/2024 14:08

The facts on which your post 5093 is based, John henry, or yet another conspiracy theory?

PS the Times hack could sue you for that comment! 🤣🤣

PPS what's it worth not to pass your post on to the Times? 🤣 🤣 Only kidding! Just like you were? 🤣

[john henry] 15/5/2024 13:58

Would appear the Times Journalist had a short on Harl.

[blakesmith] 15/5/2024 13:30

I saw the article which turned out to be speculation so

[john henry] 15/5/2024 13:24

Excellent response from the company. Looks like The Times article was highly speculative and suggestive.

[oakville] 15/5/2024 13:22

Obviously not what Blakesmith had heard. lol

So basically it was lazy journalism and many people had stop losses triggered.

[oakville] 15/5/2024 13:11

Blakesmith, what have you heard?

[jaknife] 15/5/2024 13:04

atmysignal,

"The Tories are out within 6 months
Labour won't be closing any shipyards.
Who cares what the Tories say or do. They on the way out!!"

You should read the article again. The current Government are *NOT* suggesting that any shipyards will be closed.

What they are suggesting is that it's wrong to lend money to a Harland & Wolff, which is hopelessly uncreditworthy (and which we've been pointing out here for many months).

The article notes:

"A Whitehall source insisted that the chancellor had “not blocked it yet” and the final decision was still to be made. They said they were confident that even if the loan guarantee was blocked the Belfast shipyard would build the ships, without identifying the solution." [my bold]

So, for example, one solution would be to nationalise the shipyards. Other options are also be available!

JakNife

[john henry] 15/5/2024 13:03

So Shapps announced a big increase in defence spending building x no of new ships. For Hunt to pull the plug from under a uk ship builder Harland and Wolfe just as the company completes its turnaround.

[blakesmith] 15/5/2024 13:03

Expect 4/5p soon

[oakville] 15/5/2024 13:00

Surely they have to issue some sort of RNS?

[oakville] 15/5/2024 12:57

My heart is ruling my investing head. Followed the story for years and so picked up a few thousand shares i can afford to hold.

[atmysignal] 15/5/2024 12:41

The Tories are out within 6 monthsLabour won't be closing any shipyards.Who cares what the Tories say or do. They on the way out!!

[spudtheplumber] 15/5/2024 12:39

Don't worry, islandmagee is shovel ready....

[mikeh30] 15/5/2024 12:34

What in the shipyard closure is going on here

[john henry] 15/5/2024 12:31

I'm not an Investor here so I'm looking more from the human element of the story.Harl business is in year 4 of a 5 year turnaround. Looks like the rug could be pulled from beneath just as the business is starting to see a little light at the end of a historic dark tunnel.Sell to a foreigner it's that what happens to all uk businesses

[loglorry1] 15/5/2024 12:15

"Maybe worth noting that the loan has taken these knackered derelict yards to thriving yards gaining multiple contracts employing 1000"

The loan has soaked up years of losses. Go look at the fixed asset side of the balance sheet. It's not much.

[loglorry1] 15/5/2024 12:13

Harl has no assets and the Riverstone loan would take any sale proceeds from any sales.

[john henry] 15/5/2024 12:07

Maybe worth noting that the loan has taken these knackered derelict yards to thriving yards gaining multiple contracts employing 1000

[john henry] 15/5/2024 11:54

Harl sell their assets to a Foreign buyer ?