2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
61 päivää sitten
‧10 min
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: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 20.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 26.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 26.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5.2025 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·4 t sitten · MuokattuGrok AI on Baretap12's holdings and agenda: **Short and concise explanation:** On Nordnet (especially in the feed / Shareville) one can choose to: - Hide the entire portfolio - Hide individual stocks - Show only return without showing what one actually owns or how large the position is ### Why do people do that? The most common reasons are: 1. **Avoid being «exposed»** If one is very bearish (like Baretap12) and at the same time holds stocks, or the opposite (is short and talks the stock down), many do not want others to see the real position. 2. **Avoid pressure and comments** People avoid getting questions like «why do you own it then?» or «why have you sold?». 3. **Psychological** Some want to post freely without others using their holdings against them in the debate. 4. **Strategic** In illiquid stocks like Norse, people sometimes hide positions so as not to signal whether they are about to buy more or sell. ### Especially in this thread When someone is consistently negative, posts Investtech charts and asks «10 øre?», while it is speculated that they are hiding holdings, the most common interpretation among other users is that the person either: - Has sold out and wants confirmation that it was correct, or - Is short / has sold and is trying to talk the price down, or - Owns stocks but does not want to admit it while being so negative. It is impossible to know for sure without the person themselves showing the portfolio, but that is why it is being speculated about.
What are you doing, WolfOfAllStreet? Ask Grok what it thinks about Baretap12 and Norse, before you uncritically post it here as if it were your own thoughts? This provides little value to the forum. You can ask Grok or any other AI model whatever you want, but it's not particularly interesting for the rest of us to read the answer you get.- ·4 t sittenGrok AI on most likely scenarios for Norse: **Most likely scenarios for Norse – with calculations:** **1. Sale / merger / strategic partnership (40–50 %)** The JPMorgan process results in a bid or significant partnership (IndiGo most relevant). Possible bid levels and what it yields per share (2,958 billion shares, share price 9,70): - 320 mill. USD → approx. **1,05 NOK** - 380 mill. USD → approx. **1,25 NOK** - 420 mill. USD → approx. **1,38 NOK** - 500 mill. USD → approx. **1,64 NOK** Most realistic interval: **1,05 – 1,50 NOK**. **2. Continued operation + new capital round in 2027 (25–30 %)** No deal. The company uses up the share issue proceeds and must raise more capital. New share issue → further significant dilution. The share price will likely be below 0,60–0,70 NOK over time. **3. Restructuring / bankruptcy (20–25 %)** Liquidity fails and the lessors are pressing. Equity becomes practically zero or very heavily diluted. Shareholders are left with little or nothing. **4. Partial sale of the ACMI segment (10–15 %)** Sells 5–6 aircraft + contracts. Likely yields cash equivalent to approx. **0,50 – 0,75 NOK** per share + a smaller and less risky company remaining. **Briefly summarized:** The most likely scenario is still a sale/partnership during autumn 2026 or early 2027, with a realistic outcome around 1,05–1,50 NOK. The alternative is new dilution or, in the worst case, restructuring.
·5 t sitten
In one year, it has fallen from 5 kroner to 38 øre. That it could fall to 10 øre is probably not unlikely?- 5 t sittenTämä julkaisu on poistettu.Let Grok answer you: **Concrete analysis of what Baretap12 refers to:** ### What the Investtech page actually shows The page (investtech.com for NORSE, CompanyID=101195) is a pure **technical analysis page**. As of July 20, 2026, it states, among other things: - Price: **0.41 NOK** - The stock is in a **falling trend channel** in the medium term - No support in the chart – further decline is indicated - Resistance at approx. **2.70 NOK** - Volume balance is clearly negative in the short, medium, and long term - Strong negative price development over the last 3 months (approx. –80 %) There is **no mention of Fredriksen, ownership, or shareholder lists** in the technical analysis. Baretap12 is therefore most likely looking at the ownership section / largest shareholders on Investtech or an associated overview, and comments that Fredriksen is "far far down there". ### What is the real situation with Fredriksen? John Fredriksen is involved via **Geveran Trading Company Ltd**. After the emission and conversion (as of early July 2026), the largest owners are approximately as follows: | Rank | Shareholder | Shareholding | |------|----------------------------------|-------------| | 1 | B T Larsen & Co Limited | approx. 28 % | | 2 | Clearstream Banking | approx. 9 % | | 3 | Songa Capital | approx. 8–9 % | | 4 | UBS Financial Services | approx. 5–6 % | | 5 | **Geveran Trading (Fredriksen)**| **approx. 5.4–7 %** | Fredriksen is thus among the **five largest owners**, not "far far down there" in absolute terms. But compared to B.T. Larsen (28 %), he is clearly smaller. He entered heavily via underwriting in the emission (pre-subscribed/underwrote USD 25 million). ### What this means going forward - **Positive signal**: That Fredriksen (via Geveran) chose to invest significant capital in a heavily pressured situation gives a certain credibility. He is known for being opportunistic and entering situations where he sees asymmetric upside (here: strategic review + possible sale/merger). - **Limited influence**: 5–7 % is not control. He can push for a sale or a good deal, but B.T. Larsen is in the driver's seat. - **Technical picture vs. ownership**: Investtech is very bearish technically. This matches the negative price development after the emission. The ownership (especially Fredriksen + Songa + Larsen) is what could potentially turn the tide if the strategic process delivers a bid. **In summary:** Baretap12 is right that Fredriksen is not among the absolute top owners, but he is far from irrelevant. He is one of the larger, new institutional/strategic owners after the emission. His involvement slightly increases the probability of some form of industrial solution or sale, but B.T. Larsen and the ongoing JPMorgan process still determine most. The technical picture on Investtech, however, remains clearly negative for now.
·1 päivä sittenI have asked AI again about who the most likely buyers are and it's mostly the same ones that appear, but a company that has been a bit under the radar is LEVEL, which is owned by IAG: XXXXXX No names are confirmed, but based on Norse's fleet (Boeing 787), route network and business model, analysts point to a few natural candidates. 1. IndiGo (very interesting) Already has six Norse aircraft on long-term ACMI. Focuses heavily on long-haul. Knows the Norse operation well. Could buy the rest of the company to gain access to more Dreamliners, pilots and operational expertise. This is perhaps the most industrial buyer. 2. IAG (British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Air Europa, LEVEL) Could use Norse to strengthen transatlantic capacity. Would however face competition authorities on certain routes. Has financial capacity. 3. Lufthansa Group Has historically acquired several airlines. Could be interested in the aircraft and the Heathrow/Gatwick operation. The fit is however not entirely obvious. 4. Air France-KLM Less likely, but could be interested if the price became attractive. 5. Private equity/infrastructure funds Several aviation investors have in recent years bought airlines or aircraft portfolios. May be more interested in the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI business than scheduled traffic. Who do I think are the least likely? Ryanair easyJet Wizz Air Southwest Alaska Airlines These have completely different aircraft types or business models. XXXXXXX IAG also owns Air Europa which has previously leased aircraft from Norse and knows the company well, in addition, IAG owns the low-cost company LEVEL which could prove to be a very relevant candidate. I have asked the question if LEVEL could be a suitable buyer and AI answers as follows: XXXXX I actually think IAG/LEVEL is a more interesting candidate than many first assume. Why LEVEL fits well: LEVEL already flies long-haul with Boeing 787, the same aircraft type as Norse. This significantly reduces integration costs. LEVEL has a relatively limited fleet and could grow quickly by taking over Norse's Dreamliners and crew. Norse has established an operation at London Gatwick, which is strategically important for the IAG group. IAG has previously shown that they are willing to buy companies when they believe the price is right (Aer Lingus, Air Europa attempt etc.). At the same time, there are arguments against: IAG already has strong transatlantic companies through British Airways, Aer Lingus and Iberia. Norse's own USA routes partially overlap existing IAG network. Competition authorities may look closer at certain markets if all of Norse is bought. This could make a full takeover more complicated than a purchase primarily motivated by aircraft and operational capacity. One solution could be that LEVEL becomes the operational platform that absorbs Norse, while the transaction is carried out by the IAG group. This is a scenario several industry observers have speculated in, even though there are no public indications that IAG has submitted a bid. XXXXXAdding a cross-analysis from Grok of your ChatGPT analysis: **Partially agree – but with some adjustments.** ### What I agree with: - **IndiGo as clearly the most interesting candidate** is reasonable. They already have six Norse-787s on long-term contract, know the operation, are heavily investing in long-haul, and may have industrial logic in securing more capacity, pilots, and expertise. It is the purest strategic match on the list. - That **private equity / infrastructure funds** may be relevant, especially if they value the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI contracts higher than their own route network. - That low-cost airlines (Ryanair, easyJet, Wizz etc.) are unlikely – absolutely correct, wrong aircraft type and business model. ### Where I am more skeptical / disagree: **IAG / LEVEL** is a bit oversold in my opinion. The arguments about the same aircraft type (787), Gatwick presence, and LEVEL having a small fleet are real. But: - IAG already has massive transatlantic capacity through British Airways, Iberia, and Aer Lingus. They don't necessarily need more low-cost long-haul capacity. - Competition authorities will scrutinize overlapping routes – that is a real friction. - LEVEL has not been an aggressive growth engine in recent years. IAG has prioritized other things. - It is more likely that IAG might only be interested in parts (aircraft + crews) than a full takeover of all of Norse. **Lufthansa** and **Air France-KLM** are possible, but I rank them lower than what appears. The fit is weaker, and both have enough with their own challenges. ### My ranking (more realistic): 1. **IndiGo** – strongest industrial logic 2. **Private equity / specialized aviation funds** – can be more pragmatic on price and structure 3. **IAG/LEVEL** – possible, but more complicated than presented 4. Lufthansa / Air France-KLM – lower probability **In short:** The analysis is fine and hits the main points, especially on IndiGo. But LEVEL/IAG is made a bit too «hot» in my assessment. IndiGo stands in a class of its own as an industrial buyer.
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 Q1 -tulosraportti
61 päivää sitten
‧10 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.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·4 t sitten · MuokattuGrok AI on Baretap12's holdings and agenda: **Short and concise explanation:** On Nordnet (especially in the feed / Shareville) one can choose to: - Hide the entire portfolio - Hide individual stocks - Show only return without showing what one actually owns or how large the position is ### Why do people do that? The most common reasons are: 1. **Avoid being «exposed»** If one is very bearish (like Baretap12) and at the same time holds stocks, or the opposite (is short and talks the stock down), many do not want others to see the real position. 2. **Avoid pressure and comments** People avoid getting questions like «why do you own it then?» or «why have you sold?». 3. **Psychological** Some want to post freely without others using their holdings against them in the debate. 4. **Strategic** In illiquid stocks like Norse, people sometimes hide positions so as not to signal whether they are about to buy more or sell. ### Especially in this thread When someone is consistently negative, posts Investtech charts and asks «10 øre?», while it is speculated that they are hiding holdings, the most common interpretation among other users is that the person either: - Has sold out and wants confirmation that it was correct, or - Is short / has sold and is trying to talk the price down, or - Owns stocks but does not want to admit it while being so negative. It is impossible to know for sure without the person themselves showing the portfolio, but that is why it is being speculated about.What are you doing, WolfOfAllStreet? Ask Grok what it thinks about Baretap12 and Norse, before you uncritically post it here as if it were your own thoughts? This provides little value to the forum. You can ask Grok or any other AI model whatever you want, but it's not particularly interesting for the rest of us to read the answer you get.
- ·4 t sittenGrok AI on most likely scenarios for Norse: **Most likely scenarios for Norse – with calculations:** **1. Sale / merger / strategic partnership (40–50 %)** The JPMorgan process results in a bid or significant partnership (IndiGo most relevant). Possible bid levels and what it yields per share (2,958 billion shares, share price 9,70): - 320 mill. USD → approx. **1,05 NOK** - 380 mill. USD → approx. **1,25 NOK** - 420 mill. USD → approx. **1,38 NOK** - 500 mill. USD → approx. **1,64 NOK** Most realistic interval: **1,05 – 1,50 NOK**. **2. Continued operation + new capital round in 2027 (25–30 %)** No deal. The company uses up the share issue proceeds and must raise more capital. New share issue → further significant dilution. The share price will likely be below 0,60–0,70 NOK over time. **3. Restructuring / bankruptcy (20–25 %)** Liquidity fails and the lessors are pressing. Equity becomes practically zero or very heavily diluted. Shareholders are left with little or nothing. **4. Partial sale of the ACMI segment (10–15 %)** Sells 5–6 aircraft + contracts. Likely yields cash equivalent to approx. **0,50 – 0,75 NOK** per share + a smaller and less risky company remaining. **Briefly summarized:** The most likely scenario is still a sale/partnership during autumn 2026 or early 2027, with a realistic outcome around 1,05–1,50 NOK. The alternative is new dilution or, in the worst case, restructuring.
- ·5 t sittenIn one year, it has fallen from 5 kroner to 38 øre. That it could fall to 10 øre is probably not unlikely?
- 5 t sittenTämä julkaisu on poistettu.Let Grok answer you: **Concrete analysis of what Baretap12 refers to:** ### What the Investtech page actually shows The page (investtech.com for NORSE, CompanyID=101195) is a pure **technical analysis page**. As of July 20, 2026, it states, among other things: - Price: **0.41 NOK** - The stock is in a **falling trend channel** in the medium term - No support in the chart – further decline is indicated - Resistance at approx. **2.70 NOK** - Volume balance is clearly negative in the short, medium, and long term - Strong negative price development over the last 3 months (approx. –80 %) There is **no mention of Fredriksen, ownership, or shareholder lists** in the technical analysis. Baretap12 is therefore most likely looking at the ownership section / largest shareholders on Investtech or an associated overview, and comments that Fredriksen is "far far down there". ### What is the real situation with Fredriksen? John Fredriksen is involved via **Geveran Trading Company Ltd**. After the emission and conversion (as of early July 2026), the largest owners are approximately as follows: | Rank | Shareholder | Shareholding | |------|----------------------------------|-------------| | 1 | B T Larsen & Co Limited | approx. 28 % | | 2 | Clearstream Banking | approx. 9 % | | 3 | Songa Capital | approx. 8–9 % | | 4 | UBS Financial Services | approx. 5–6 % | | 5 | **Geveran Trading (Fredriksen)**| **approx. 5.4–7 %** | Fredriksen is thus among the **five largest owners**, not "far far down there" in absolute terms. But compared to B.T. Larsen (28 %), he is clearly smaller. He entered heavily via underwriting in the emission (pre-subscribed/underwrote USD 25 million). ### What this means going forward - **Positive signal**: That Fredriksen (via Geveran) chose to invest significant capital in a heavily pressured situation gives a certain credibility. He is known for being opportunistic and entering situations where he sees asymmetric upside (here: strategic review + possible sale/merger). - **Limited influence**: 5–7 % is not control. He can push for a sale or a good deal, but B.T. Larsen is in the driver's seat. - **Technical picture vs. ownership**: Investtech is very bearish technically. This matches the negative price development after the emission. The ownership (especially Fredriksen + Songa + Larsen) is what could potentially turn the tide if the strategic process delivers a bid. **In summary:** Baretap12 is right that Fredriksen is not among the absolute top owners, but he is far from irrelevant. He is one of the larger, new institutional/strategic owners after the emission. His involvement slightly increases the probability of some form of industrial solution or sale, but B.T. Larsen and the ongoing JPMorgan process still determine most. The technical picture on Investtech, however, remains clearly negative for now.
- ·1 päivä sittenI have asked AI again about who the most likely buyers are and it's mostly the same ones that appear, but a company that has been a bit under the radar is LEVEL, which is owned by IAG: XXXXXX No names are confirmed, but based on Norse's fleet (Boeing 787), route network and business model, analysts point to a few natural candidates. 1. IndiGo (very interesting) Already has six Norse aircraft on long-term ACMI. Focuses heavily on long-haul. Knows the Norse operation well. Could buy the rest of the company to gain access to more Dreamliners, pilots and operational expertise. This is perhaps the most industrial buyer. 2. IAG (British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Air Europa, LEVEL) Could use Norse to strengthen transatlantic capacity. Would however face competition authorities on certain routes. Has financial capacity. 3. Lufthansa Group Has historically acquired several airlines. Could be interested in the aircraft and the Heathrow/Gatwick operation. The fit is however not entirely obvious. 4. Air France-KLM Less likely, but could be interested if the price became attractive. 5. Private equity/infrastructure funds Several aviation investors have in recent years bought airlines or aircraft portfolios. May be more interested in the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI business than scheduled traffic. Who do I think are the least likely? Ryanair easyJet Wizz Air Southwest Alaska Airlines These have completely different aircraft types or business models. XXXXXXX IAG also owns Air Europa which has previously leased aircraft from Norse and knows the company well, in addition, IAG owns the low-cost company LEVEL which could prove to be a very relevant candidate. I have asked the question if LEVEL could be a suitable buyer and AI answers as follows: XXXXX I actually think IAG/LEVEL is a more interesting candidate than many first assume. Why LEVEL fits well: LEVEL already flies long-haul with Boeing 787, the same aircraft type as Norse. This significantly reduces integration costs. LEVEL has a relatively limited fleet and could grow quickly by taking over Norse's Dreamliners and crew. Norse has established an operation at London Gatwick, which is strategically important for the IAG group. IAG has previously shown that they are willing to buy companies when they believe the price is right (Aer Lingus, Air Europa attempt etc.). At the same time, there are arguments against: IAG already has strong transatlantic companies through British Airways, Aer Lingus and Iberia. Norse's own USA routes partially overlap existing IAG network. Competition authorities may look closer at certain markets if all of Norse is bought. This could make a full takeover more complicated than a purchase primarily motivated by aircraft and operational capacity. One solution could be that LEVEL becomes the operational platform that absorbs Norse, while the transaction is carried out by the IAG group. This is a scenario several industry observers have speculated in, even though there are no public indications that IAG has submitted a bid. XXXXXAdding a cross-analysis from Grok of your ChatGPT analysis: **Partially agree – but with some adjustments.** ### What I agree with: - **IndiGo as clearly the most interesting candidate** is reasonable. They already have six Norse-787s on long-term contract, know the operation, are heavily investing in long-haul, and may have industrial logic in securing more capacity, pilots, and expertise. It is the purest strategic match on the list. - That **private equity / infrastructure funds** may be relevant, especially if they value the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI contracts higher than their own route network. - That low-cost airlines (Ryanair, easyJet, Wizz etc.) are unlikely – absolutely correct, wrong aircraft type and business model. ### Where I am more skeptical / disagree: **IAG / LEVEL** is a bit oversold in my opinion. The arguments about the same aircraft type (787), Gatwick presence, and LEVEL having a small fleet are real. But: - IAG already has massive transatlantic capacity through British Airways, Iberia, and Aer Lingus. They don't necessarily need more low-cost long-haul capacity. - Competition authorities will scrutinize overlapping routes – that is a real friction. - LEVEL has not been an aggressive growth engine in recent years. IAG has prioritized other things. - It is more likely that IAG might only be interested in parts (aircraft + crews) than a full takeover of all of Norse. **Lufthansa** and **Air France-KLM** are possible, but I rank them lower than what appears. The fit is weaker, and both have enough with their own challenges. ### My ranking (more realistic): 1. **IndiGo** – strongest industrial logic 2. **Private equity / specialized aviation funds** – can be more pragmatic on price and structure 3. **IAG/LEVEL** – possible, but more complicated than presented 4. Lufthansa / Air France-KLM – lower probability **In short:** The analysis is fine and hits the main points, especially on IndiGo. But LEVEL/IAG is made a bit too «hot» in my assessment. IndiGo stands in a class of its own as an industrial buyer.
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: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 20.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 26.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 26.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5.2025 |
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti
61 päivää sitten
‧10 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: FactSet, Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 20.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5. | ||
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 26.2. | ||
2025 Q3 -tulosraportti 26.11.2025 | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 19.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 21.5.2025 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·4 t sitten · MuokattuGrok AI on Baretap12's holdings and agenda: **Short and concise explanation:** On Nordnet (especially in the feed / Shareville) one can choose to: - Hide the entire portfolio - Hide individual stocks - Show only return without showing what one actually owns or how large the position is ### Why do people do that? The most common reasons are: 1. **Avoid being «exposed»** If one is very bearish (like Baretap12) and at the same time holds stocks, or the opposite (is short and talks the stock down), many do not want others to see the real position. 2. **Avoid pressure and comments** People avoid getting questions like «why do you own it then?» or «why have you sold?». 3. **Psychological** Some want to post freely without others using their holdings against them in the debate. 4. **Strategic** In illiquid stocks like Norse, people sometimes hide positions so as not to signal whether they are about to buy more or sell. ### Especially in this thread When someone is consistently negative, posts Investtech charts and asks «10 øre?», while it is speculated that they are hiding holdings, the most common interpretation among other users is that the person either: - Has sold out and wants confirmation that it was correct, or - Is short / has sold and is trying to talk the price down, or - Owns stocks but does not want to admit it while being so negative. It is impossible to know for sure without the person themselves showing the portfolio, but that is why it is being speculated about.What are you doing, WolfOfAllStreet? Ask Grok what it thinks about Baretap12 and Norse, before you uncritically post it here as if it were your own thoughts? This provides little value to the forum. You can ask Grok or any other AI model whatever you want, but it's not particularly interesting for the rest of us to read the answer you get.
- ·4 t sittenGrok AI on most likely scenarios for Norse: **Most likely scenarios for Norse – with calculations:** **1. Sale / merger / strategic partnership (40–50 %)** The JPMorgan process results in a bid or significant partnership (IndiGo most relevant). Possible bid levels and what it yields per share (2,958 billion shares, share price 9,70): - 320 mill. USD → approx. **1,05 NOK** - 380 mill. USD → approx. **1,25 NOK** - 420 mill. USD → approx. **1,38 NOK** - 500 mill. USD → approx. **1,64 NOK** Most realistic interval: **1,05 – 1,50 NOK**. **2. Continued operation + new capital round in 2027 (25–30 %)** No deal. The company uses up the share issue proceeds and must raise more capital. New share issue → further significant dilution. The share price will likely be below 0,60–0,70 NOK over time. **3. Restructuring / bankruptcy (20–25 %)** Liquidity fails and the lessors are pressing. Equity becomes practically zero or very heavily diluted. Shareholders are left with little or nothing. **4. Partial sale of the ACMI segment (10–15 %)** Sells 5–6 aircraft + contracts. Likely yields cash equivalent to approx. **0,50 – 0,75 NOK** per share + a smaller and less risky company remaining. **Briefly summarized:** The most likely scenario is still a sale/partnership during autumn 2026 or early 2027, with a realistic outcome around 1,05–1,50 NOK. The alternative is new dilution or, in the worst case, restructuring.
- ·5 t sittenIn one year, it has fallen from 5 kroner to 38 øre. That it could fall to 10 øre is probably not unlikely?
- 5 t sittenTämä julkaisu on poistettu.Let Grok answer you: **Concrete analysis of what Baretap12 refers to:** ### What the Investtech page actually shows The page (investtech.com for NORSE, CompanyID=101195) is a pure **technical analysis page**. As of July 20, 2026, it states, among other things: - Price: **0.41 NOK** - The stock is in a **falling trend channel** in the medium term - No support in the chart – further decline is indicated - Resistance at approx. **2.70 NOK** - Volume balance is clearly negative in the short, medium, and long term - Strong negative price development over the last 3 months (approx. –80 %) There is **no mention of Fredriksen, ownership, or shareholder lists** in the technical analysis. Baretap12 is therefore most likely looking at the ownership section / largest shareholders on Investtech or an associated overview, and comments that Fredriksen is "far far down there". ### What is the real situation with Fredriksen? John Fredriksen is involved via **Geveran Trading Company Ltd**. After the emission and conversion (as of early July 2026), the largest owners are approximately as follows: | Rank | Shareholder | Shareholding | |------|----------------------------------|-------------| | 1 | B T Larsen & Co Limited | approx. 28 % | | 2 | Clearstream Banking | approx. 9 % | | 3 | Songa Capital | approx. 8–9 % | | 4 | UBS Financial Services | approx. 5–6 % | | 5 | **Geveran Trading (Fredriksen)**| **approx. 5.4–7 %** | Fredriksen is thus among the **five largest owners**, not "far far down there" in absolute terms. But compared to B.T. Larsen (28 %), he is clearly smaller. He entered heavily via underwriting in the emission (pre-subscribed/underwrote USD 25 million). ### What this means going forward - **Positive signal**: That Fredriksen (via Geveran) chose to invest significant capital in a heavily pressured situation gives a certain credibility. He is known for being opportunistic and entering situations where he sees asymmetric upside (here: strategic review + possible sale/merger). - **Limited influence**: 5–7 % is not control. He can push for a sale or a good deal, but B.T. Larsen is in the driver's seat. - **Technical picture vs. ownership**: Investtech is very bearish technically. This matches the negative price development after the emission. The ownership (especially Fredriksen + Songa + Larsen) is what could potentially turn the tide if the strategic process delivers a bid. **In summary:** Baretap12 is right that Fredriksen is not among the absolute top owners, but he is far from irrelevant. He is one of the larger, new institutional/strategic owners after the emission. His involvement slightly increases the probability of some form of industrial solution or sale, but B.T. Larsen and the ongoing JPMorgan process still determine most. The technical picture on Investtech, however, remains clearly negative for now.
- ·1 päivä sittenI have asked AI again about who the most likely buyers are and it's mostly the same ones that appear, but a company that has been a bit under the radar is LEVEL, which is owned by IAG: XXXXXX No names are confirmed, but based on Norse's fleet (Boeing 787), route network and business model, analysts point to a few natural candidates. 1. IndiGo (very interesting) Already has six Norse aircraft on long-term ACMI. Focuses heavily on long-haul. Knows the Norse operation well. Could buy the rest of the company to gain access to more Dreamliners, pilots and operational expertise. This is perhaps the most industrial buyer. 2. IAG (British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Air Europa, LEVEL) Could use Norse to strengthen transatlantic capacity. Would however face competition authorities on certain routes. Has financial capacity. 3. Lufthansa Group Has historically acquired several airlines. Could be interested in the aircraft and the Heathrow/Gatwick operation. The fit is however not entirely obvious. 4. Air France-KLM Less likely, but could be interested if the price became attractive. 5. Private equity/infrastructure funds Several aviation investors have in recent years bought airlines or aircraft portfolios. May be more interested in the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI business than scheduled traffic. Who do I think are the least likely? Ryanair easyJet Wizz Air Southwest Alaska Airlines These have completely different aircraft types or business models. XXXXXXX IAG also owns Air Europa which has previously leased aircraft from Norse and knows the company well, in addition, IAG owns the low-cost company LEVEL which could prove to be a very relevant candidate. I have asked the question if LEVEL could be a suitable buyer and AI answers as follows: XXXXX I actually think IAG/LEVEL is a more interesting candidate than many first assume. Why LEVEL fits well: LEVEL already flies long-haul with Boeing 787, the same aircraft type as Norse. This significantly reduces integration costs. LEVEL has a relatively limited fleet and could grow quickly by taking over Norse's Dreamliners and crew. Norse has established an operation at London Gatwick, which is strategically important for the IAG group. IAG has previously shown that they are willing to buy companies when they believe the price is right (Aer Lingus, Air Europa attempt etc.). At the same time, there are arguments against: IAG already has strong transatlantic companies through British Airways, Aer Lingus and Iberia. Norse's own USA routes partially overlap existing IAG network. Competition authorities may look closer at certain markets if all of Norse is bought. This could make a full takeover more complicated than a purchase primarily motivated by aircraft and operational capacity. One solution could be that LEVEL becomes the operational platform that absorbs Norse, while the transaction is carried out by the IAG group. This is a scenario several industry observers have speculated in, even though there are no public indications that IAG has submitted a bid. XXXXXAdding a cross-analysis from Grok of your ChatGPT analysis: **Partially agree – but with some adjustments.** ### What I agree with: - **IndiGo as clearly the most interesting candidate** is reasonable. They already have six Norse-787s on long-term contract, know the operation, are heavily investing in long-haul, and may have industrial logic in securing more capacity, pilots, and expertise. It is the purest strategic match on the list. - That **private equity / infrastructure funds** may be relevant, especially if they value the Dreamliner fleet and ACMI contracts higher than their own route network. - That low-cost airlines (Ryanair, easyJet, Wizz etc.) are unlikely – absolutely correct, wrong aircraft type and business model. ### Where I am more skeptical / disagree: **IAG / LEVEL** is a bit oversold in my opinion. The arguments about the same aircraft type (787), Gatwick presence, and LEVEL having a small fleet are real. But: - IAG already has massive transatlantic capacity through British Airways, Iberia, and Aer Lingus. They don't necessarily need more low-cost long-haul capacity. - Competition authorities will scrutinize overlapping routes – that is a real friction. - LEVEL has not been an aggressive growth engine in recent years. IAG has prioritized other things. - It is more likely that IAG might only be interested in parts (aircraft + crews) than a full takeover of all of Norse. **Lufthansa** and **Air France-KLM** are possible, but I rank them lower than what appears. The fit is weaker, and both have enough with their own challenges. ### My ranking (more realistic): 1. **IndiGo** – strongest industrial logic 2. **Private equity / specialized aviation funds** – can be more pragmatic on price and structure 3. **IAG/LEVEL** – possible, but more complicated than presented 4. Lufthansa / Air France-KLM – lower probability **In short:** The analysis is fine and hits the main points, especially on IndiGo. But LEVEL/IAG is made a bit too «hot» in my assessment. IndiGo stands in a class of its own as an industrial buyer.
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