A group of Harland & Wolff shareholders has raised alarms over the future of the historic shipbuilding company, amid unconfirmed reports that the business could be broken up and sold off in parts.
In an email sent to the UK Defence Journal this weekend, the shareholders—who claim to collectively own nearly 30% of the company—expressed concerns that such a move could jeopardise crucial naval contracts and result in significant financial losses for both shareholders and employees.
The shareholders, organised under the name HARL Shareholders Collective, allege that discussions with Australian billionaire Clive Palmer, who owns a 3% stake in Harland & Wolff, have heightened their fears.
According to the collective, Palmer confirmed that the Board of Directors (BOD), with the backing of Rothschilds, has so far refused to engage in talks about a potential rescue plan, despite Palmer’s interest in providing financial support. The shareholders suspect that the Board, potentially under the influence of a US lender, may be considering a pre-pack administration deal that could see the company’s assets sold off, leaving shareholders with little to no return.
“We are now under the impression that the group under instruction of the US lender are intent on selling the business possibly by means of a pre-pack administration deal in which shareholders will be wiped out without any say in the matter,” the collective wrote.
The shareholders expressed deep concern about the potential impact on the UK’s naval capabilities, particularly in light of the ongoing Fleet Solid Support (FSS) contract. They warned that the break-up of Harland & Wolff could lead to the company being sold off in parts. This, they argue, could threaten the UK’s ability to build naval vessels, with significant implications for national security.
“From what we hear, it is likely that the company will be broken up and sold off in bits which threatens the future of the FSS contract,” the shareholders cautioned. “Especially if the yards are sold to the current duopoly—BAE and Babcock—[this] risks significant job losses and will ultimately weaken our capabilities as a nation to build future ships for our Navy.” They added that this is “of significant concern in light of the current global threats.”
The collective also highlighted the potential personal impact on employees, noting that around 400 Harland & Wolff workers are also shareholders. They warned that these employees could be left with nothing if the company is sold for a low sum: “If the business was to be sold for a small sum, they equally would all lose out,” the email stated.
Call for extraordinary general meeting
In response to these concerns, the HARL Shareholders Collective has called for an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) with the company’s directors, aiming to ensure that shareholder interests are represented in any future decisions about the company’s fate. Palmer has reportedly indicated his support for the shareholders and is expected to meet with senior management in early September to discuss the situation further.
“We feel that the public should be aware of these discussions,” the collective added, underscoring the potential national implications if Harland & Wolff’s naval work is put at risk by a sale or break-up of the company.
Recent financial struggles
Despite facing financial difficulties in recent years, the company remains a key player in the UK’s defence sector. However, the company’s financial stability has been increasingly uncertain.
In 2022, Harland & Wolff was awarded a significant naval contract as part of Team Resolute, alongside Navantia UK and BMT, to deliver the Royal Fleet Auxiliary’s three new Fleet Solid Support vessels. Despite this, the company has faced setbacks, most recently losing out on a £120 million contract with the Falkland Islands Government, which had previously named Harland & Wolff as its preferred bidder for the project.
These financial challenges have continued into 2024, with the company recently securing a £19.5 million loan to support its ongoing operations after the UK Government rejected a £200 million loan application due to concerns over taxpayer risk. The loan brings the total borrowed from its lender to just over £109 million.
As part of a broader strategy to stabilise operations, Harland & Wolff has announced the closure of its Isles of Scilly operations and the departure of Chief Executive John Wood, who is taking a leave of absence following the government’s rejection of support.
As the situation develops, the UK Defence Journal will continue to provide updates.
At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!
I am kinda expected H&W to be sold to Babcock in a government arranged pre-pack administration, BAE would probably be interested but would expand their already existing majority share of the Naval industry.
If there is genuine finance on offer from a shareholder not exploring that option could leave the directors on the naughty step as they will have disadvantage creditors.
Problem is the administrators are only interested in their fees.
H&W staff do have a hand in this with their clinging on to four days weeks etc.
The wider shareholders and directors concern (400 staff are shareholders) is that the US shareholder willing to put in more money is only interested in breaking the company up into four parts and selling its infrastructure and equipment which jeopardises the yards ability to deliver the actual government contracts, which kills its ability to continue as a functional shipyard and leading to it being shuttered and mass redundancies.
I was pouting towards the AUS 3% shareholder…..
Well, he’s reportedly wanted to build a Titanic II for some time…
Or is it they fear a loss of income ? 🤔
Very troubling for the future delivery of the excessively delayed build of our new solid supply support ships when we have just an over-aged single ship left.
Don’t worry, I was down at Priddy’s Hard last week, there were a dozen Polish digging a big pit, we’ll be OK.
Don’t worry the ships were always planned to be built in Spain
So despite spending £1 billion a day since coming into office the government decides not to act as gaurantor for a loan, despite FRS and MRSS. Their first defence decision.🙄
I really don’t do politics but I bet this latest bunch will be worse than the last lot. The sad thing is that the last lot were so bad that everyone voted for this lot.
Everyone !
Only 22 % of those eligible voted for
Labour
And I do believe that their landslide
Majority is referred to as Democracy
The Little pinks are lecturing us on democracy, that’s rich 😀
You not knoweth of what you speak
22% get what they want
And as for the 78 % Well ?
Tis Simple Mathematics that you require Lecturing upon
I don’t know where we’re going on defence. The Tories, normally quite sensible on defence, were bad to say the least, but every Labour govt. I’ve known, and there have been several, has cut defence. I may be surprised this time but I’m not holding my breath.😤
I think there are some byzantine rules concerning eligibility for loan guarantees. It’s complicated. I reckon HMG will act so as to safeguard jobs and shipbuilding capacity. The govt are not going to subsidise shareholders if they can avoid it; they will have to look after themselves.
They were only going to use the loan to help refinance a quarter of their existing high interest venture capital loans, not use it for any actual investment in the business, which makes it a poor investment for tax payers. Even then according their books they would have more money going out servicing loans than revenue generated by contracts, its not a viable business as long as these loans exist.
Agree, structurally it looks like HW are buggered as a company and all a guarantee would do is ensure creditors and shareholders got a guaranteed payout on the taxpay when it finally failed.
Have you done some research on “Harland & Wolff Holdings Plc” ? If not it’s pretty interesting and to be blunt I can’t blame Labour or the previous Tory Government from saying no. It’s a loan guarantee so they can get a cheaper loan to pay off their present ones. When they couldn’t get backing from any major commercial lender due to “due financial diligence and only a US one said yes but at 14% interest that says a lot. Any company with over £1.6 billion of Government orders shouldn’t struggle to get a loan, unless they didn’t like what… Read more »
I’m sure you’ve heard the saying that banks only lend money to those who don’t need it. It’s more true in this country than many. I blame the Tories more than Labour. Once they had given the contract and agreed the loan guarantee in principle, they had a duty to the taxpayer and the country to follow through. Their waivering for six months is what caused all the problems. It was a simple equation for this government: do we stand to lose more money providing the loan guarantee or not? I would argue that the downside of not providing the… Read more »
Very true in the UK particularly for SMEs.
I’m not against HMG ensuring that the Belfast H&W yard, its workforce and the FSS project are secured. But I just feel to many are being bedazzled by that Historic name of Harland & Wolff. The clowns who run InfraStrata has adopted that for the holding company and use it like a Comfort Blanket. They bought the Belfast yard (for £6m), then Appledore and then the 2 in Scotland, none of which had a secure pipeline of work and then decided to get into the Ferry business. Meanwhile they are in hock to a US Finance company at 14%, the… Read more »
Precisely, this is what a lot of people seem to be missing. This “business” has as much to do with the historic H&W as China’s MG has to do with the former UK marque. The whole business looks set up to blackmail the UK govt into guarantee loans, match investment, and promise contracts, while siphoning off as much cash as possible to management and dodgy creditors. It needs to be left to die as it would in any competitive market and then then useful the bits bought by BAE or Babcock or maybe even Navantia themselves, whether they call it… Read more »
Paul, Watcher and ABC…forgive me if I save my fingers and try to come back to you collectively. You are all right of course. If a business is viable it shouldn’t have a problem getting a loan. BUT. I have four concerns.,not in any particular order. (1) Labour have made two decisions about defence before the SDR next year. (2) They are talking about nationalising the railways and also setting up the “Great British Energy Co.” Between them they will cost billions and yet a Guarantee on a loan? No. (3) If H & W go down where are we… Read more »
FSSS is paid for, at worst (depending on how you look at it) will be built in Spain, MRSS certainly could be cancelled though.
FSS isn’t paid for, its funding is in the agreed spending plan. In fact come to think of nothing being built or planned is paid for. It’s in the future spending plan and payments are scheduled.
Building abroad ? So strike action next then.
Wdym?
The unions have always made it clear with the lasr government, rightly I think, that they are opposed to shipbuilding going abroad and I know there have been two occassions when they have said they’ll take industrial action
HW and Wolff going down does not mean the yard and workforce go go down…separate the company from the assets…essentially the yard will get sold of for pennies in the pound to Babcock or BAE who will take it one…the structural dept gets eaten by the HW shareholders has creditors…not the taxpay…this one is not about defence it’s about the taxpayer getting shafted to protect the shareholders of a structurally inadequate company that got iself into so much debt it become a bad credit risk…HW is gone…what will define the government will be how it protects the national strategic assets… Read more »
H&W getting a cheaper loan is not about the taxpayer getting shafted. Ask yourself what a cheaper loan actually means. Less money going from UK defence, flowing into the American finance system. That’s it. Financial risk reduces because less money is bleeding from the company.
It’s a self-fulfilling prophesy, saying there’s financial risk. Because you say it, it becomes true. Consolidate the loan and it becomes false.
Sorry mate that’s not the case…it’s not about getting a cheap loan it’s about a company that cannot get anyone to loan it the money because it’s a credit risk and is going bust…any company with a a billion + government contract would normally find itself flush with offers for loans at good rates from banks and investors….the fact is this company was forced to take a very high interest loan from a speculator because no one else would lend it money…it needs the guarantee because every bank and investor know that they will almost inevitably call it in…..consider the… Read more »
Maybe.
The thorny bit is the workforce still want WFH shipbuilding on a four day week. The union think that is OK.
Unless the union start shouting loudly that they are very happy with five and six day weeks then I suspect the yard won’t be saved.
The answer to that is “the company has gone bust, here is your redundancy payment and a P45”.
Then negotiate new T’s n C’s, I may be an ex Engineering union member but even I know that a 4 day week stinks.
Good if you can get them through..now I’m self employed I work on a 15 hour week…20 if I’m feeling energetic.
I’m not anti union.
I’m anti stupid unions that kill their members employers and therefore their members jobs with stupidity.
sectarianism in Irish and Scottish yards was going on even before the the troubles. people faced intimidation and threats even as far back as the 60*s, nothing was done about it and the affair apparently is still going on. like Scotland religion is being used to hide bigger issues in society you only have to look at the sectarian football clubs, Celtic and rangers, hi s and hearts both of the Dundee clubs an dependandepe dent Scotland would possibly end out like northern Ireland where people can’t even agree on the day of the week.
I used to be a AUEW Steward here in Derby and things were very “sensible”. Most of us were / are shareholders. and remember our parents living through every worker carries the tribal memory of 1971.
A 4 day week in a SB yard is a joke.
Once the yard is sold for pennies on pound..the workforce will not have much choice but to apply for jobs with the new company….if HMG attached the contract to the Yard…Nevantis will find its UK partner to run the yard…I would lay money on a Babcock or BAE working partnership with Nevantis around the yard and contract.
My point is that it is unrescuable until the 4 day week nonsense is sorted.
Even via a P45 route it may be that nobody wants to hire the unionised workforce because of this. The union have shot themselves in the foot by trying to strong arm the ridiculous. You can’t have the levels of productivity a massive site like that needs on with the site doing nothing 3/7ths of the time. The overhead loss is massive.
That may be the end isn’t shipbuilding in Belfast for good.
Maybe the P45 will shake the unions up a bit…
You would hope so.
Clearly, the local branch still live in the 1970’s.
👏🏼👊🏻
If it is sold off to one of them I will be content. The only thing I’m concerned about is the space and capability being available to carry on with existing “orders” assuming labour don’t cancel them. There is an article in the D.T. 😏 today saying that civil servants have been told to look for savings of 20 per cent in defence R&D. If true it’s another decision priot to the SDR.
That would be a bad move to be honest.
👍
I think you are slightly overstating the case re the Railways, they are not Nationalising it, they are just letting the present Operators licenses expire. Network Rail already own and operate the Track, Stations, Signaling etc, so all they are doing is taking over the TOC function. There will be a new Headquarters for GBR and it will be in Derby, which is about as central as you can get and Network Rail has sufficient land and buildings to accommodate it without spending much money. FYI according to the figures of both the present and previous Government it will save… Read more »
Taking railways into public ownership is nationalisation. If it is owned by the government it has to be paid for by the government ie taxpayers. Have they got the money to buy out shareholders and run the services. ? Answer.. no.
Back to defence I’v read this evening that civil sevants have been told to prepare cuts of 20 % in defence R&D. Could be wrong but what if the story is correct/
Sorry, this is very, very delusional. The day a Train Operator is Nationalised, all their outstanding lease liabilities and pension / employee liabilities need to be taken onto the government balance sheet. ie the Reported National Debt increases by billions. The government / GBR then needs to purchase, ie PAY FOR all outstaning operational assets, including Maintenance depots specialist tooling multi-year stocks of spare parts and consumables diagnostic equipment multi milllion gbp IT systems including hand helds, diagnostic equipment, predictive maintenance, bar coding, shelf life management etc They then need to convince the engineering talent running these firms that they… Read more »
I agree, I could see BAE taking over the yard as being a great thing. It’s doesn’t matter who owns it or what it’s called the main thing is the yard is their to build and service warships.
Because the manufacture of ships and tanks and planes are safeguarded once you are a BAE subsidiary. Like Vospers, Vickers and Blackburn.
There is a massive synergy if they did, just get Govan to produce the Hot Work in the new automated plate shop and ship it to H&W. That’s a big saving.
to be fair the request went in in May and the conservative treasury blocked the request and then the Labour administration went and essentially continued and confirmed that refused to guarantee the loan…Both governments Labour and conservative essentially refused to provide the guarantees…not sure why but both decided it looked like a bad deal….I suspect the yard will be be given to Babcock or BAE for peanuts..along with the contract….personally I believe in intervention to keep a vial business going…..but it looks like HW are looking like good money after bad…in the end it’s the yard and workers that need… Read more »
The request first went in last November and was agreed in principle by ministers last December. However, the Treasury kept blocking asking for different conditions. By May, the whole thing was in the press as a statement that H&W was about to go bankrupt.
The Tories didn’t actually make a formal decision on it. Both were concerned of bad optics with Taxpayers needing to pick a tab if it failed Problem is with H&W they had no shipbuilding expertise when they signed the contract so need financing to build that up, its fairly normal upfront investment that any new business will need to make, yes H&W is essentially a startup. tbh they should have sorted out the payment milestones with the government to get a bit more up front cover or investment from the prime, Navantia. I spoke to someone at H&W a couple… Read more »
Last government reached the same decision.
No. The last government was too scared to reach a decision at all, with Defence and Business arguing in favour and Treasury arguing against.
No the last government called the election before making a final decision so Labour had to make the decision on winning. Tories knew Labour were getting in so no need to make a decision give it to the next government, then call them out, Tories can now say they would have backed H&W cos in opposition you can say anything as you don’t need to deliver it. I thought you understood politics 😀
They didn’t, they dithered.😏
We cannot afford to loose any ship building capacity.
Tbf H&W never even got started on FSSS, was yet to be seen if they could become a useful shipyard.
kr scrapyard
Loosing the company does not mean we loss ship building capacity…the assets and workforce can and will likely be moved…that’s the important bit…
To where. You’re not gonna get the whole workforce moving across the water to whatever is the next surviving shipyard, and the drydock and cranes aren’t going anywhere
That dock is not the holding company…the dock is worth 6million..HMG could buy it and gift it to Babcock or BAE to run.. You need to separate the national asset which is the dock from the holding company which is a leach… HW is nothing more than a name, the holding company purchased the Belfast dock and HW name 5 years ago for 6 million pounds…it then purchased appledore for 7 million and methil and arnish yards for 850,000…it created a company with assets and then used those assets to load 200 million in debts on the company…if HMG guaranteed… Read more »
I’m still not convinced the government will do anything about the shipyard or buy it up. Or at the very least they don’t care when FSSS comes into service, only that it’s UK built.
We can only wait and see…I will bitch with the best if they sacrifice actual new industrial capacity and military shipbuilding…to me the holding company is irrelevant as are the grasping greedy management team.
I don’t think he means physically moved, but moved over to be run by a new and experienced operator.
Just think TUPE !
ht moved to where? that’s a big question.
Most of the new staff recruited for the FSS contract come from Babcock and BAe 😀
Appledore would be a loss though.
Food for thought
‘ Border Poll ‘
They’re RFA ships, we’ve built them overseas before
iv no issues with using ships built in other countries. j drive a foreign car u watch a TV from a non British country. when I was at sea, all I cared about was, is it safe? will it get me home again I think there’s no problem with buying a foreign warship, after all, everyone else doe. the only built-in the UK policy is an archaic one. if you’ve nowhere to do it, the subject is moot.
Personally I’m pro UK manufacturing in general but you make a good point some people posting on here probably have a Samsung tv, a foreign car outside, an iPhone and holiday abroad, all these purchases send UK pounds to foreign countries. Heck, we import 40+ billion pounds on vehicles every year, if people are really that concern about UK jobs give up the BMW and by a Nissan made in Sunderland.
Its also odd most of the Eurofighter is made outside the UK but that’s OK. When half a ship is made outside the UK in Spain its betrayal.
Will be interesting to see what happens with FSS if H&W goes.
Solely built by Navantia, or perhaps a deal done with Babcock to do some of the production and block assembly at Rosyth.
Thought Cammell Laird was on the up but they don’t seem to feature in any discussions on future shipbuilding these days. Too rough an experience with RSS David Attenborough?
CL no longer have a SB workforce and Rosyth cannot be used for large Block builds.
Simple reason for the latter is the workforce are busy on not delivering T31’s and the Drydock has to be kept available for the QE’s.
The latter reason is solved if H&W gets back up and running, the Belfast Dock is massive and hasn’t the access issues of Rosyth.
SB workforce?
Take your points regarding Rosyth being busy.
I’m dubious whether the H&W dock would ever be used though. The site doesn’t have the same MoD involvement and presumably there is a servicing contract with Babcock.
SB is Ship Building. CL got shot of the workforce after the Attenborough. CL are pretty well 100% refit and maintenance these days and spookily owned by Peel Group, who also own AP at Falmouth. They don’t do shipbuilding but what is the real shame is they own Port Glasgow including the now disused Inchgreen Dock.
Why not sell it to Babcock or BAES? I think this is the only practical solution. UK shipbuilding order is NOT enough to keep three ship builders. As a ship builder, BAES is smallish, Babcock is small, and H&W is tiny, in global standards. If united with Babcock or BAES, the Belfast worker can get subcontracts for T31 ans/or T26 blocks.
Then, in future, Clyde and/or Rosyth worker can get subcontracts for FSSS ans/or MRSS blocks.
Just win-win.
Babcock has the Rosyth yard, not sure why they’d fork out for another large dock.
BAE is guaranteed T83 work, they don’t have to worry about getting more work
It enables Babcock (and/or BAES) to bid for MRSS work, after completing FSSS. They both are too small, especially Babcock.
For example, T32 will be dead, because of no money (better spend on salary up). MRSS is the only hope for Babcock to survive as a ship builder. With Belfast yard, Babcock can continue CVF support while building MRSS, I think.
Sure but H&W needs so much work when they could fudge large ship building in Rosyth instead, though yes absolutely issues with overlapping with carriers.
Babcock sold A&P so they’re not looking for excess capacity
A and P was a bit specific and not a large contract ship builder…I would imagine either company would take a large yard that is going to get major large ship construction contracts.
T32 , should be replaced by the purchase of thealready retired LCS LCS from the Americans they’ve had issues yesterday, buy the RN had similar with the T45. if anyone can get the best out of the ships it’s us. a transfer of one with the option to buy more makes perfect sense. They’re techno current and more importantly,, they are already built. you can’t get a modern frigate for less than 100 millionand for that I think we could get a very good deal on them. there arCS operating with the 5th and 6th fleets and by all accounts… Read more »
An LCS wouldn’t give us any better capability than a River class. I don’t see the point in taking them on just to keep up numbers and in turn have to deal with all their issues.
One of the two will take it…it will go for pennies in the pound as the creditor will only be interested in getting the loan value out of the company….it’s the shareholders that will take the hit….as long as they save the yard and workforce that’s the strategic asset…in reality the government would be better off supporting either Babcock or BAE to take on the yard..than throw 200 million down the drain of a buggered company..just so the shareholders don’t loss out.
I may be wrong but I think all the interested parties are justifiably sitting back and waiting to see what happens. The Big Elephant in the H&W Holdings formerly InfraStrata) back garden is that it has been suspended from the stock exchange as it failed to get its accounts audited, signed off and submitted. That just screams to me that HMG (both of them) were right to say no ! So let the holdings company fold and administrators appointed, they’ll keep going what they can and sell off to recoup some money to the creditors. One other thing that does… Read more »
Indeed the company is rotten..it’s a classic case of asset stripping via debt, happens a lot in the nursing home sector…you buy an asset rich chain..convert all the assets into debt extract the money…put the company into administration and walk away.. HMG guaranteeing the 200million debt would simply top up the company’s asset sheet so it can be restripped…you can pretty much guarantee that within 3 years it would be 400million in debt…and HMG would be asked for more guarantees or have to pay out the 200million as the company when into administration. I had not considered the possibility of… Read more »
hmm so nothing to do with buying Appledore or Bifab, or needing to invest in revamping buildings, buying kit, or poaching people from BAe or Babcock to bring in expertise increasing the wage bill? In the last annual report the staff costs increased from 9m to 32m, a lot of this was for tendering and in anticipation of new business. Just a quick google shows you’re off the mark. First time I’ve heard of asset stripping by investing in revamping buildings and buying equipment. You’re also forgetting Infrastrata bought the already failed yard that had little going for it, H&W… Read more »
yep I’ve reviewed the company reports going way back to when this was just an energy company….it’s been a rotten company for a long time…where it is now has had nothing to do with investing…it’s not raised loans for investment in the yards..if you look at its financials you will see it raised around 17-8 million in extra shares for that….the debt has come from losses…..and it’s going to suck in more losses…I see no reason at all for HMG to simply cover a companies share holders for losses…also if you look you will see before it become HW holdings… Read more »
But that’s not asset stripping through debt. Plus, the need to finance has been their since 2021. I never said it was well run they made a couple of poor decision like the ferry business . More importantly the ex CEO was far too out spoke for the political class which is the more likely reason why the political cold shoulder has been given. If it’s was taking loans to pay shareholders, the share price in the past would have reflected that with excessive dividends paid, that didn’t happen. Personally, I think they had big ambitions and growth plans beyond… Read more »
It’s more profit stripping via debt…look at it this way..the company had an 18million income in 2021 and 400 employees ( essentially a small/medium business) …yet it’s 2 executive directors were each taking home a million pounds a year….and the company had in in financial liabilities 80 million pounds in share options mainly for senior leaders ( I believe the spreed was 50% at 1p and 50% at £1.50)……..and it was still pushing out £300,000 a year in share profits. sorry this company is rotten, I will stand by that just look at its accounts and remuneration…even a good portion… Read more »
Can I remind you what you posted 2 months ago prior to the election. Much more positive about HW no mention of rotten management. The facts haven’t changed in 2 months. But the government has. 😀 Your response to one of my comments. If we get the proper investment in HW Belfast and really leaver the hell out of Navantia…we have a lot of larger none complex warships that need building… if we then also make sure sure the smaller yards ( appledore etc) get a good selection of the smaller craft orders as well as modular work on the… Read more »
yes two months ago I had not reviewed their accounts or looked at their renumeration and the history of the company..after they asked for the guarantee and later when the CEO was sacked I did all that and realised what shaky company it was and the fact it was not in reality HW an experienced ship builder..but a bunch of chancers that had purchased a dock for 6million…after failing in their core business of energy extraction, what can I say I was wrong..to be honest that company should not have been given a huge and complex ship building contract….it’s a… Read more »
Funny most major news channels recognise that the debt is the result of gearing up for the new work scheduled. Debt is normal and doesn’t mean you don’t pay dividends, in 1008 General Electric had debts of 500b but still pays a dividend. Oil and Gas companies use debt to finance new fields for instance, you present your plan to the lender and they will judge if they will get a return. The more risk the higher the rate. H&W borrowed on the back of promised loan from Boris at high rates the PM changed and with it the backing… Read more »
is there a case for a yard dedicated to the building of warships?
The loan guarantee was to support the banks if it went pear shape not the shareholders. Shareholders only make money if dividends are paid or the share increase in value and they sell. You paint them in a negative light, but very often shareholders are asked to buy more shares so a company can invest that cash to grow the business, effectively they are assuming the capital risk. Today I think H&W has a total market cap of 15m, which means to raise 200m they would need to issue 13 times the number of shares so its impossible for the… Read more »
Hi expat the reason HW ( Belfast ) LTD is in the mess it is is because it’s owner HW holdings plc ( what what infrastrata plc) is a complete financial pool of shite….it was a perfectly adequate energy company 6 years ago…it then purchased a load of shipyards and went dolally flip…while making all these purchases and bring in investment it was paying plenty of dividends…it’s problems hit when it the CEO and some of the major shareholders ( who came in around 2019/20..with a major equity buy in od around 18million if I remember correctly)..got all ambitious…and it… Read more »
Giving it to BAE/Babcock is gifting one set of shareholders at the expense of another. One question is what will happen to the carefully constructed contract with Navantia? The second is by how much would the price of future ships rise due to less competition? The third is why wouldn’t BAE close down the shipyard in a few years, as they did to VT?
It might even be better if Navantia take over as Navantia UK, keeping the level of competition high.
There Is no comparison between VT and H&W, VT had been moved to Portsmouth and just building Blocks for T45 and OPV’s. All of which can be built by the yards on the Clyde and probably cheaper(Labour & land prices in Hampshire 🤷🏼♂️).
H&W is now unique in the U.K. a building dock and gantries that can build up to 333,000 tonnes and a Dry Dock that can take a US CVN with room to spare. The synergies between Belfast and Govan would be tempting to BAe.
To keep the level of competition high, you need the “loser” to survive. This in turn need enough orders, which UK do not provide. Simple fact. If HMG need to support H&W bet to make them survive, there is no competition already. When you are “forced” to let Belfast get some bid, precious bids, to enable it to survive, there is no competition already. If Navantia buys the yard, and if they failed the MRSS bid, how can they survive? From what point Navantia continues to operate Belfast yard with no order for decades? And, if Belfast gets MRSS order,… Read more »
T32 won’t happen, if that I’m sure it’s still just a scribble on the back of a fag packet
H&W is in the news due to FSS, but it does ship repair, off shore energy and runs a gas storage facility. Its also never stated it will relay on UK orders to survive.
maybe dedicated factories would be a benefit for example,a yard specialized for naval construction.
And who would own it. Gov ain’t gonna pay for it.
Why not that’s what Australia does, yards are state owned and leased to which ever company has gained the contact to build A, B or C.
Navantia built the Hobart’s at ASC yard at Osborne, BAe are now doing the same with the Hunter class at the same yard.
Same for the Collins SSK (Kockums) and future SSN(A) (BAe).
It seems to work quite well and investment made by the Government in infrastructure and facilities ends up owned by Government and not the contractor.
Sure but that would involve having an intelligent government with a long term plan. Right now it seems like they’d rather the contract defaulted to Navantia in Spain and saved them a buck
intelligent government? can’t be done.
If the work is undertaken in Spain, the Treasury will lose around £300m-£400m in tax revenue.
Interesting, still I’ve already lost faith in this government’s intelligence on defence matters. At the very least we’d get them somewhat on time from Spain.
I think that HMG owning the bare yard and leasing it to the Spanish is a good way towards.
That way HMG don’t get involved in workforce issues.
seems a fair idea. write to your MP.and ask them to pass it on to someone who gives a shit. I’ve regularly written about the RN in issues, but all I ever get back is either a list of what can’t be done and a copy of the government manifesto😭😡😡
let the BBC and foreign aid budgets cover it.BBC? STRICTLY COME DANCING AND MATCH OF THE DAY that where money should be coming from licence fees for what? the BBC is shite.
I wouldn’t be surprised is BAE try to buy it simply for the drydock. If they want to bid on anything bigger than destroyer they have to rely in either H&W or babcock which cuts into there profits. As for the smaller yards H&W own it doesn’t look good.
I mean arguably their existing shipyards are secured work via T83 and potentially more t26 for Norway, why stick their neck out and potentially lose to rosyth on big ship work.
Clive Palmer has a ‘colourful’ reputation in Australia, and I would be extremely concerned if he were to gain control H&W…
Infact you would not want Palmer anywhere near a strategic industry, especially one that has 200 million in government debt guarantees….he would lever that to create greater debt, a profoundly greedy man.
If the British government go into business with a CP owned H&W they will deserve every bit of the subsequent chaos that comes their way.
It seems unlikely that the current Government would want H&W to collapse. That said it will not want to be seen as throwing money at problems. As time moves along the Government will find it more and more difficult to hide their true nature.
Kier has thus far seemed strong on the riots (although some may suggest unnecesarily strong) which bodes well for defence issues. That said we need shipyards to build ships.
As I far as I can make out from the info on the public domain, H&W is financially no longer a going concern [again]. A buyout of the core shipyard facility in Belfast by Babcock or Navantia for a nominal sum seems to be the best outcome that we can hope for.
The PM said that him and the government would work with our industry specially in the Defence industry .What a good start 🙄
Just for a change of pace, I was just reading this:
It’s talking about the United States. I know misery loves company, but that’s our strongest ally. It makes it even more important that we get our strategy right.
The new government has failed in its first test of supporting UK industry as promised whilst in opposition. If H&W fold then Spain will pick up all the work on the fleet support ships. No one hold your breath for an increased support package for Tata and British Steel as another strategic industry teeters on the brink.
Becoming very worried.
Could we just buy out H&W and turn it into a Royal Dockyard and then lease it to companies such as BAE, Babcock etc We do need H&W for our FSS and future MRSS possibly even for some large Amphibs. If the Government could just get these projects moving the yard should be safe in the long run. Both dry docks at H&W Belfast would also be very usefull for the carriers, possibly if we could cover the dry dock at Queens Island it could be useful as a secondery dock for subs, its big enough.
I expect that in a pre-pack sale, unencumbered, they’ll generate a great deal of interest. How often do you get a chance to buy into a £800 m government guaranteed revenue stream? If it has to be Babcocks, so be it. They don’t really compete with Navantia.
The shareholders will be wiped out but hey, thems the breaks, the important thing is the workforce and that massive dry dock, which is a strategic asset