2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
UUTTA
2 päivää sitten
‧30 min
0,5821 NOK/osake
Irtoamispäivä 27.8.
9,21%Tuotto/v
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 24.8. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 18.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 27.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 14.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·1 päivä sittenSo I've listened through the presentation and what I'm really wondering about is related to the comments under Opal, "vendor-related technical issues identified during production ramp-up" and "close collaboration with client on production optimisation and spare-parts lead times, shifting Practical Completion to Q2 2027". If it's a third-party supplier that has failed to deliver: a) Shouldn't one expect them to cover a large part of the cost of replacement? b) I have no idea what the normal delivery time for this membrane is and to what extent it is a standard or custom-made product, but if it comes directly from our sub-supplier, shouldn't we expect them to work their ass off to be able to deliver earlier than in 2027? The answers to this obviously depend on what we have in the contract with the supplier. But it seems very strange to me that suppliers are blamed for the errors that have occurred, while there is nothing to suggest that they are held responsible, nor that they take part in the clean-up work. Perhaps someone with better insight than me in the FPSO/O&G world has an opinion?
As I know the industry, I don't think anyone would have dared to deliver anything if they were to be so responsible, they can go bankrupt and then one is more stuck… there can be many reasons why things don't work, especially problematic with delays… then equipment is possibly not followed up, maintained etc. during that period because it is not in operation…
·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWe get a reminder about the project risk in the FPSO market. It might be good to keep in mind, for those of us who are also heavily invested in BWE, when the technically difficult Maromba field is to be developed.
Petrobras spent almost 9 years on its one FPSO project, so in that respect, BWO are racers in comparison. But if one is not in full prod before next year, we are talking about 7 years from start to 100% production. With such long lead times, financing, rising interest rates, geopolitical unrest, general project risk, how does the future look for the more complicated FPSOs? It is indeed difficult to calculate profitability without factoring in large margins. Will BWO "dare" to undertake a new project like BW Opal?- ·2 päivää sittenIt states in the Q2 report that: BW Offshore announced a strategic review on 5 December 2025. The strategic review is ongoing with interested parties conducting due diligence, but timeline is impacted by the revised Practical Completion of BW Opal. Has it been written previously that one is at the stage of Due Diligence? This probably means that one must have discussed price, right?
I find it a bit strange that depreciation expense was taken now due to the delay of PC and that revenues are received that are not booked in the P&L but directly against the balance sheet, but the depreciation went through the P&L. I understand that accounting rules are like that, but the net effect is practically much smaller as I understood it. Also positive that Marco mentioned that BW Catcher is relevant for redeployment and that due diligence is ongoing from interested parties. 
·2 päivää sittenDownturn became gift package with accumulation at 38.65:-)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
UUTTA
2 päivää sitten
‧30 min
0,5821 NOK/osake
Irtoamispäivä 27.8.
9,21%Tuotto/v
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·1 päivä sittenSo I've listened through the presentation and what I'm really wondering about is related to the comments under Opal, "vendor-related technical issues identified during production ramp-up" and "close collaboration with client on production optimisation and spare-parts lead times, shifting Practical Completion to Q2 2027". If it's a third-party supplier that has failed to deliver: a) Shouldn't one expect them to cover a large part of the cost of replacement? b) I have no idea what the normal delivery time for this membrane is and to what extent it is a standard or custom-made product, but if it comes directly from our sub-supplier, shouldn't we expect them to work their ass off to be able to deliver earlier than in 2027? The answers to this obviously depend on what we have in the contract with the supplier. But it seems very strange to me that suppliers are blamed for the errors that have occurred, while there is nothing to suggest that they are held responsible, nor that they take part in the clean-up work. Perhaps someone with better insight than me in the FPSO/O&G world has an opinion?As I know the industry, I don't think anyone would have dared to deliver anything if they were to be so responsible, they can go bankrupt and then one is more stuck… there can be many reasons why things don't work, especially problematic with delays… then equipment is possibly not followed up, maintained etc. during that period because it is not in operation…
- ·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWe get a reminder about the project risk in the FPSO market. It might be good to keep in mind, for those of us who are also heavily invested in BWE, when the technically difficult Maromba field is to be developed.Petrobras spent almost 9 years on its one FPSO project, so in that respect, BWO are racers in comparison. But if one is not in full prod before next year, we are talking about 7 years from start to 100% production. With such long lead times, financing, rising interest rates, geopolitical unrest, general project risk, how does the future look for the more complicated FPSOs? It is indeed difficult to calculate profitability without factoring in large margins. Will BWO "dare" to undertake a new project like BW Opal?
- ·2 päivää sittenIt states in the Q2 report that: BW Offshore announced a strategic review on 5 December 2025. The strategic review is ongoing with interested parties conducting due diligence, but timeline is impacted by the revised Practical Completion of BW Opal. Has it been written previously that one is at the stage of Due Diligence? This probably means that one must have discussed price, right?I find it a bit strange that depreciation expense was taken now due to the delay of PC and that revenues are received that are not booked in the P&L but directly against the balance sheet, but the depreciation went through the P&L. I understand that accounting rules are like that, but the net effect is practically much smaller as I understood it. Also positive that Marco mentioned that BW Catcher is relevant for redeployment and that due diligence is ongoing from interested parties.
- ·2 päivää sittenDownturn became gift package with accumulation at 38.65:-)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 24.8. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 18.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 27.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 14.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti
UUTTA
2 päivää sitten
‧30 min
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 24.8. | ||
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 18.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 27.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 14.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 |
0,5821 NOK/osake
Irtoamispäivä 27.8.
9,21%Tuotto/v
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·1 päivä sittenSo I've listened through the presentation and what I'm really wondering about is related to the comments under Opal, "vendor-related technical issues identified during production ramp-up" and "close collaboration with client on production optimisation and spare-parts lead times, shifting Practical Completion to Q2 2027". If it's a third-party supplier that has failed to deliver: a) Shouldn't one expect them to cover a large part of the cost of replacement? b) I have no idea what the normal delivery time for this membrane is and to what extent it is a standard or custom-made product, but if it comes directly from our sub-supplier, shouldn't we expect them to work their ass off to be able to deliver earlier than in 2027? The answers to this obviously depend on what we have in the contract with the supplier. But it seems very strange to me that suppliers are blamed for the errors that have occurred, while there is nothing to suggest that they are held responsible, nor that they take part in the clean-up work. Perhaps someone with better insight than me in the FPSO/O&G world has an opinion?As I know the industry, I don't think anyone would have dared to deliver anything if they were to be so responsible, they can go bankrupt and then one is more stuck… there can be many reasons why things don't work, especially problematic with delays… then equipment is possibly not followed up, maintained etc. during that period because it is not in operation…
- ·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuWe get a reminder about the project risk in the FPSO market. It might be good to keep in mind, for those of us who are also heavily invested in BWE, when the technically difficult Maromba field is to be developed.Petrobras spent almost 9 years on its one FPSO project, so in that respect, BWO are racers in comparison. But if one is not in full prod before next year, we are talking about 7 years from start to 100% production. With such long lead times, financing, rising interest rates, geopolitical unrest, general project risk, how does the future look for the more complicated FPSOs? It is indeed difficult to calculate profitability without factoring in large margins. Will BWO "dare" to undertake a new project like BW Opal?
- ·2 päivää sittenIt states in the Q2 report that: BW Offshore announced a strategic review on 5 December 2025. The strategic review is ongoing with interested parties conducting due diligence, but timeline is impacted by the revised Practical Completion of BW Opal. Has it been written previously that one is at the stage of Due Diligence? This probably means that one must have discussed price, right?I find it a bit strange that depreciation expense was taken now due to the delay of PC and that revenues are received that are not booked in the P&L but directly against the balance sheet, but the depreciation went through the P&L. I understand that accounting rules are like that, but the net effect is practically much smaller as I understood it. Also positive that Marco mentioned that BW Catcher is relevant for redeployment and that due diligence is ongoing from interested parties.
- ·2 päivää sittenDownturn became gift package with accumulation at 38.65:-)
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt