Rolls-royce Share Discussion Threads

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 17:27

Cevodniya19 Jun '23 - 13:34 - 12149 of 12158
0 1 0
Institutional Investments, it's blatantly obvious that you are a bear re Rolls-Royce shares, so simply go with your analysis and short the stock.
If you haven't, why post 20 or 30 comments a day on a share you have no exposure too, it's simply nadness.

…..

Cev, I’m glad it’s obvious I am bearish else I would be disappointed with your analysis 😂

I see nothing wrong with analysing both sides of market

You guys are doing the pump side so il cover the risk side

Balance

[drew lonmenob] 19/6/2023 17:25

Jibber jibber loon

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 17:23

You are all betting on another ‘pig flying’ future project? Great. Hope history doesn’t repeat itself yet again te worth fk all by the time if all gets going. If ever

In the interim, market must work to what is now, what it shall be like in 2028 based on assured flows and whatnot

Not looking good

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 17:20

CITYTTRADER19 Jun '23 - 14:06 - 12150 of 12156
0 1 0
Don’t think market fully understands todays news

…..

Maybe market just has a different perspective. Problem is, whether market is right or wrong, none of us can beat markets view

[pyglet] 19/6/2023 15:46

I thought there was a competition on.

[standish11] 19/6/2023 15:41

The current government is guilty of many things but I am not yet convinced that they can do much to advance the SMR programme ahead of regulatory approval.

As I understand it the situation remains as per an article last year in Newcivilengineer.com:

Rolls-Royce is expecting to receive UK regulatory approval for its small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) by mid-2024 with a view to powering up by 2029 – two years ahead of schedule.

[mcunliffe1] 19/6/2023 15:15

I suspect (only suspect mind) that the 'news' is the hope that SMR's will provide the growth for RR.

It is the Small Modular Reactors that caused me to invest in RR initially. However, the current government seems not to be moving quickly enough in support of SMR's and I doubt the next government will be any better irrespective of the winning party.

We seem to dislike nuclear in the UK.

We love overly expensive wind farms and solar power and seem prepared to overpay for such; the same will be true of Hinckley as well.

But SMR's, are less expensive to produce than traditional, large reactors and perhaps, if sited in the correct places, would not entice massive planning objections.

We can only hope.

[drew lonmenob] 19/6/2023 15:11

jibber jibber II loon with your 50 usernames from your pikey caravan

[fearny1984] 19/6/2023 15:01

What news is that?

[smurfy2001] 19/6/2023 14:54

All in all, the momentum here tells me that Rolls-Royce will head back to a £4 share price at some point.

[cityttrader] 19/6/2023 14:06

Don't think market fully understands todays news. Hopefully it soon will because we should be at 175 now,

[cevodniya] 19/6/2023 13:34

Institutional Investments, it's blatantly obvious that you are a bear re Rolls-Royce shares, so simply go with your analysis and short the stock.
If you haven't, why post 20 or 30 comments a day on a share you have no exposure too, it's simply nadness.

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 13:09

Got a funny feeling I’m talking to one or two staff here in a company share scheme 😂

Anyway, GLA

Check back in next month

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 13:05

To conclude for today

“Market Innocence shall be highlighted over the rest of 2023, for one of us”

II

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 13:03

The event required real cash you see. Something RR know little about

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 13:01

Ukraine war…..

It just accelerated RRs position of weakness to be highlighted

You talk about generating billions and 300 billion over time etc

Yet it hadn’t 2 pence when an event came. If it wasn’t a golden share, it was a bust

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 12:58

Im sure most RR staff are innocent. But then it wasn’t most of them ‘shaking hands’

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 12:57

I never mentioned the Ukraine war

Wouldn’t it be better to stick to your own analysis rather than making up mine?

II

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 12:56

Never been accused of innocence before 😂

It is not I that came up with the word crime . That can be credited to the courts and Serious Fraud Office……

My point of it was this

It’s spanned many countries over circa 3 decades. As soon as they got the lenient deferred prosecution, debt etc spiralled since, forcing dilutions snd sell offs

Prior to being charged, it never got very far anyway even breaking laws for business

So how can they succeed now?

If 30 years isn’t enough evidence for you, maybe need to work in your innocence and naivety within markets

[careful] 19/6/2023 12:51

You keep using the word 'crime'.

Aviation is a tough business and sometimes competitors are forced to do what is required to get business.
They all play the same game.

'Commissions' or 'consultation fees' or even downright gifts are the norm in many situations.

The scandal of the huge multi billion defence contract in Saudi Arabia a few years ago in the Thatcher era, creating work and wealth for many years. So many connected people, too shocking to name, were given generous amounts of cash as 'consultants' even if they were obviously clueless.

If you think this whole Ukraine war is nothing to do with corruption you are very innocent.
And the £6m Boris gets from speaking, even Theresa May £2m for a speech to Saudi recently.
Do you think it is all innocent?

RR.executives relatively honest and straight dealing, but sometimes.......

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 12:45

All the things you mention like well paid jobs etc, sure, great in community terms. But as an investment thread, deplorable costs

[institutional investments] 19/6/2023 12:43

I ask to exclude new project forecasts due to history of same. It has literally lived on ‘future projects’ for an investor generation

[careful] 19/6/2023 12:34

It means that RR. is a very important valuable company.

In previous times it was thought wise to include a 'statement of value added'.
Some thought that it was more important than profit.

In simple terms in means that when comparing the value of 2 different companies,assumed to be identical in every respect, there were other factors.

Company A pays its workers well and provides generous pensions. It invests in assets and research for the the future, and pays a fair amount of corporation tax.
..but its bottom line is poor.

Company B pays its workers poorly, does not invest in the future, and registers operations overseas to avoid corporation tax.
..its bottom line is good.

The great Arnold Weinstock said he never looked at profit, the number could be fiddled.
He looked at cash flow after considering capital investments.
He always suspected companies that claimed good profits as their net debt rose.

Look at 'Fred the shred's' profit record RBS before the financial crash.
The balance sheet was loaded with junk.