![](/cdn/assets/images/search/clock.png)
We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rolls-royce Holdings Plc | LSE:RR. | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B63H8491 | ORD SHS 20P |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10.80 | 2.51% | 441.80 | 442.40 | 442.60 | 444.30 | 430.00 | 430.00 | 24,148,982 | 16:35:15 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aircraft Engine,engine Parts | 16.49B | 2.41B | 0.2884 | 15.34 | 36.05B |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
09/7/2024 09:10 | The potential of Rolls Royce at the moment is just phenomenal !! | ![]() thegrafter | |
09/7/2024 08:59 | I was there, onboard and stood at the bar part of the time as I read that report on the A380. A great read eeza. Ta! | ![]() mcunliffe1 | |
09/7/2024 08:07 | Thanks eeza ! | ![]() thegrafter | |
09/7/2024 06:52 | eeza , can you post the article? | ![]() thegrafter | |
08/7/2024 12:31 | WE all know SMR's are the best option. That is one of the reasons I first invested my grandkids into RR at £1.20 a share. I joined the party a little later. The REAL question though is what this new government feels about SMR's. In my opinion Pal44's question in post # 2461 is a good one and one that hasn't been fully answered on this thread - probably because none of us know. We might indeed be 18 months ahead of the competition but if the decision to select the two companies to proceed is further delayed this allows the competitors time to catch up. I feel there's two parts to SMR's. The first is their use in generating electricity with lower CO2 emissions than fossil fuels. The second is the export potential afforded to the company that ultimately wins and is backed/underwritten by the UK taxpayer. Taking the first point, solar and wind probably provide a similar low CO2 emission as SMR's. Solar and wind are tried and tested and whilst not able to provide energy constantly they are a major contributor overall. Taking the second point, irrespective of the winning SMR bid there's no guarantee the factory manufactured units will be made in this country especially if orders from foreign countries arrive on the back of the UK govt. stamp of approval. RR already makes 'stuff' in other countries. So, it will take a brave minister/government to stick their neck out and make a decision. Such beasts are a rare breed. It will, in my opinion be left to the quango named GB Energy to make that decision and I think they will delay such partly to allow themselves time to become fully acquainted with the facts and partly because they will also be wary of making such a monumental decision. My guess as to when somebody makes a decision on two companies to proceed is....autumn 2025. It is just a guess. | ![]() mcunliffe1 | |
08/7/2024 11:26 | The financing of SMR's would probably require some private finance, reading between the lines what Labour are saying. This could take time, HMG will not make an open ended commitment using taxpayers cash. | ![]() careful | |
08/7/2024 10:30 | VK, hits the nail on the head. Big heavy industry needs a lot of power, 24hrs a day. SMR feeds this need and can take a large chunk of that load, of course in the right places at the right times and the right ambition. Cars have been the prime example of the tail wagging the dog, eco but unstainable in the current electrical supply situations. same goes for building 1.5million homes. They are not going to be self generating of power, they should all have some form of renewable as standard but planning regs don't make it mandatory yet, which is bonkers given that its the cheapest and most efficient way to include when building from scratch and the developers get massive economies of scale rather than single installs I figure the new Gov has 12 months to set their stall, get things moving or its business as usual and radical moves wont happen. | ![]() sdt7618 | |
08/7/2024 09:57 | 14 years ago the labour party didn't want nuclear. They were closing coal down and they knew there would be a supply shortage but refused to do anything about it. The conservatives came in and had to rush into building nuclear and wind. But the big elephant in the room is that heavy electric cars need more energy to move so in order to reduce co2, etc they must produce more electricity either wind or nuclear and wind don't work all the time so we are using more fossil fuels to run our eco electric cars! | vikingwarrier | |
08/7/2024 09:14 | Pal , it doesn't matter what his view is because it's a requirement of the future for this country, full stop ! | ![]() thegrafter | |
08/7/2024 07:48 | Milliband is he pro Nuclear ? | ![]() pal44 | |
07/7/2024 19:46 | RR are 18 months ahead of everyone | vikingwarrier | |
07/7/2024 17:45 | RR need to get ahead of the potential competition | smurfy2001 | |
07/7/2024 11:31 | Cheers skinny , and Roger I'm with you on this one ! RR SMRs are the gift horse for anyone coming into power , clean green energy security for the next 60 years , deployment where you need the power and massive jobs / wealth creation . No brainer, let's just wait for the announcement ;-) I think we will see it above 6.00 though roger !!! | ![]() thegrafter | |
07/7/2024 10:23 | Thanks thegrafter - clickable link :- | ![]() skinny | |
07/7/2024 10:12 | https://www.thisismo | ![]() thegrafter | |
06/7/2024 17:56 | My confidence comes from the fact that he has expressed he means business in his speeches since yesterday, he would already be up to date with situation, and the Labour rhetoric to date indicates they want to match the commitment by the conservatives:The Conservative Party manifesto, published on Tuesday, says that if it was in power after the election "within the first 100 days of the next Parliament, we will approve two new fleets of small modular reactors" and "halve the time it takes for new nuclear reactors to be approved, by allowing regulators to assess projects while designs are being finalised, improving join-up with overseas regulators assessing the same technology and speeding up planning and environmental approvals". | ![]() rogerrail | |
06/7/2024 15:40 | It would show he means business if he does. We live in hope. | ![]() freddie01 | |
06/7/2024 14:59 | Keir did mention nuclear yesterday, let's see if that's specific to SMR. Farage did mention SMR ;) | smurfy2001 | |
06/7/2024 14:51 | Roger: I do very much hope you are correct in regards to Starmer's support for SMR's. But, I have a gut feel he will NOT proceed within 100 days. I suspect he'll leave the 'decision' to G B Energy who will drag their feet for several months. If a decision is ever made to create an SMR it will be given to two competing companies - one of which will likely be RR - one will be American. There will be undisclosed backroom threats and sweeteners involved. IMO of course. | ![]() mcunliffe1 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions