Carrilion in trouble
Discussion
Recent changes in the law this year mean that any fatalities will be costing 40 to 50 times that amount in fines if negligent.
Time to buy was 3 weeks ago at 42p before they jumped to mid 60p, I am sure there were a few £ made.
Like Balfour Beatty a few years ago they will continue to find holes in the balance sheet. Will be interesting to see what happens as they are part of a HS2 jv.
Spot on comment above out who shouts loudest.
Time to buy was 3 weeks ago at 42p before they jumped to mid 60p, I am sure there were a few £ made.
Like Balfour Beatty a few years ago they will continue to find holes in the balance sheet. Will be interesting to see what happens as they are part of a HS2 jv.
Spot on comment above out who shouts loudest.
ALawson said:
Recent changes in the law this year mean that any fatalities will be costing 40 to 50 times that amount in fines if negligent.
Time to buy was 3 weeks ago at 42p before they jumped to mid 60p, I am sure there were a few £ made.
Like Balfour Beatty a few years ago they will continue to find holes in the balance sheet. Will be interesting to see what happens as they are part of a HS2 jv.
Spot on comment above out who shouts loudest.
One for the brave and professionals only perhaps. As you mention it will be interesting to se where they go from thier current situation. If the talked of ‘Rights Issue’ fails they are doomed failing a minor miricle by the looks of things.Time to buy was 3 weeks ago at 42p before they jumped to mid 60p, I am sure there were a few £ made.
Like Balfour Beatty a few years ago they will continue to find holes in the balance sheet. Will be interesting to see what happens as they are part of a HS2 jv.
Spot on comment above out who shouts loudest.
vonuber said:
I'm glad I never went into contracting. Too many aresholes
This is largely correct. It does, though, make it all the more pleasant when you deal with people who are level-headed and reasonable. Certainly in the past four years I've had final account negotiations with commercial teams at Interserve, Vinci, and BAM that were "tricky" but sensible. A BAM account worth £480k to us was, in 2015, concluded in a couple of hours over the phone.Conversely, some of the worst to deal with are "medium" sized contractors with the age-old "subbie-bashing" mentality. A few years ago, an adjudicator mentioned to me that Wates hold regular internal conferences on, "How To Screw Sub-Contractors". How much truth there was in that, I'm not sure but the lengths some main contractors will go to in an effort to reduce an account is - honestly IME - mind boggling.
Ny experience is from the principal designer / client team side.
Most energy seems to be expended by contractors in seeing how they can either 1) not build something they are contracted to do 2) build something different but cheaper (and who cares if it works/ will be approved, or is what the client needs) 3) do a half arsed job, hoping no-one will notice by the time they are off site and it becomes someone else's problem. Or a claim that will only make lawyers rich.
Most energy seems to be expended by contractors in seeing how they can either 1) not build something they are contracted to do 2) build something different but cheaper (and who cares if it works/ will be approved, or is what the client needs) 3) do a half arsed job, hoping no-one will notice by the time they are off site and it becomes someone else's problem. Or a claim that will only make lawyers rich.
My office is in the same black as one of Carillion's.
It's certainly much quieter round here than it was 2 years ago. They used to park in our spaces, block us in etc and now 80% of their spaces are empty.
There's been a lot of changes in terms of their office usage and large parts of it are currently empty.
It's certainly much quieter round here than it was 2 years ago. They used to park in our spaces, block us in etc and now 80% of their spaces are empty.
There's been a lot of changes in terms of their office usage and large parts of it are currently empty.
vonuber said:
Ny experience is from the principal designer / client team side.
Most energy seems to be expended by contractors in seeing how they can either 1) not build something they are contracted to do 2) build something different but cheaper (and who cares if it works/ will be approved, or is what the client needs) 3) do a half arsed job, hoping no-one will notice by the time they are off site and it becomes someone else's problem. Or a claim that will only make lawyers rich.
I work for one of the big main contractors and I think we are pretty fair with the supply chain, however competency to deliver works that are assured against the design is lacking across the board. Its only when you start forensically looking into issues you discover significant anomalies in paperwork. Most energy seems to be expended by contractors in seeing how they can either 1) not build something they are contracted to do 2) build something different but cheaper (and who cares if it works/ will be approved, or is what the client needs) 3) do a half arsed job, hoping no-one will notice by the time they are off site and it becomes someone else's problem. Or a claim that will only make lawyers rich.
There is a distinct lack of appreciation of connections, interfaces between different metals, general material performance/suitability the list goes on.
If you look at the http://www.structural-safety.org/ website you will see there is massive concern in general competency especially those undertaking cladding works. Grenfell tower is a cast in point, Edinburgh schools etc. There must be significant numbers of legacy issues out there across the board.
Clients and their designers are somewhat responsible, scheme costs don't reflect reality and then we have "value engineering", sometimes it works, other times as you state there is a failure in the design process and then its too late. Insufficient engineering due diligence leading to significant quality/safety issues.
The issues have not changed but people's understanding of contracting has.
At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
ClaphamGT3 said:
The issues have not changed but people's understanding of contracting has.
At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on. At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
ClaphamGT3 said:
The issues have not changed but people's understanding of contracting has.
At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
This is an excellent assessment. Contracting is a risk management business. Most contractors fail to recognize that, most go bust eventually. At its heart, contracting is not a profession. It is a risk-taking manufacturing process (albeit of a bespoke product manufactured in situ rather than in a factory) where the contractor uses skill and experience to price a contract on less than complete information and a wide range of inevitable variables and still make money.
Increasingly sophisticated procurement routes and client-side advisors have progressively driven the speculation element out of contracting to the point where sub 2% net margins are commonplace. Given the amount of capital that contractors need to commit to deliver a project of scale, that isn't sustainable and so contractors are increasingly aggressive in seeking margin improvement.
Contracting is increasingly globalising and, much like the automotive industry 30 years ago, it is possible to envisage that, within 10 years there will be only half a dozen 'large' contractors as we would currently define them globally. These will be highly diversified businesses with huge balance sheet strength where building and civil engineering contracting is only one business line
Margins for most are wafer thin. The techniques used to drive margins up vary, but don't always need to be aggressive. With the scale of projects these days & the risk that clients are looking for contractors to take only the biggest will survive. However diversity has historically taken down the unwary.
I'll go back to my earlier point also. Historically the UK based contractors & the UK construction industry as a whole got fat dumb & happy on public sector contracts & housebuilding. It never learned to compete or execute effectively or creatively. Hence the UK contractors are big fish in a small pond.
crankedup said:
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.
I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces. GT03ROB said:
crankedup said:
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.
I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces. You wont see it from your ivory tower
SystemParanoia said:
GT03ROB said:
crankedup said:
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.
I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces. You wont see it from your ivory tower
GT03ROB said:
SystemParanoia said:
GT03ROB said:
crankedup said:
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.
I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces. You wont see it from your ivory tower
Like crabs in a pot from one side.. and angry boots of stomp on the other
GT03ROB said:
crankedup said:
Inevitablity of an increasingly unsavoury workplace for ordinary people, judging from the behaviour of already existing Corporations? Marx was correct when he stated that the commercial world will be just a few huge conglomerates, as you mention with many strings to thier bows. Wether this is good,bad or indifferent I am not at all sure, but the steam roller steams on.
I would not agree. I've been in the industry for a long time & size does not inevitably lead to unsavoury workplaces. GT03ROB said:
SystemParanoia said:
And not all grunts make it to the ladder.
Wouldn't do if they did..... somebody has to grunt....But you can't make claims about something you have absolutely no experience in.
The people living with those conditions daily will certainly disagree with Mr powerfully built
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff