Babcock Offshore to exit market??

[helicrazi]

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/babcock-eyes-offshore-exit-as-competition-intensifies/136807.article

[cyclic]

Just listened to the quarterly call and the CEO says they will see out the existing contracts when asked. Not sure how that aligns with the Flight Global article.

[helicrazi]

Bethel says although Babcock will continue to service its existing contracts from Aberdeen, the other operators are “in a price war with each other” which “we don’t really want to join”.

[Blackhawk9]

Yep as he said he doesn't want to get into a bidding war with CHC and Bristow undercutting each other in a race to the bottom, both of which are recording big losses in the UK sector.
Babcock are the main offshore operator in Australia so a bit different out there.

[industry insider]

Babcock are the main offshore operator in Australia so a bit different out there.

I wouldn't say they are the "main" offshore operator Blackhawk 9. CHC has as many if not more aircraft in offshore ops than Babcock in Australia.

FYI Babcock lost $19m AUD in the year to April 2019. Some of that is probably operating loss. Not sure how long big Cock in UK is going to keep donating cash to little Cock in Australia?

[Blackhawk9]

I think CHC has 3 x 92's with Shell in Broome, 3 x 139's and 1 x 189 in Karratha , I think that's it in offshore now , some 92's , 139's and a 189 all returned in last year, Babcock has 2 x 92's , 2 x 175's and 5 x 139's on 4 different contracts in 4 locations.

[tu154]

The timing of the article is curious. Couple of big contracts close to award time. Misrepresent what was said. Sow the seeds of doubt in some minds. Surely not.

[barbados sky]

I think CHC has 3 x 92's with Shell in Broome, 3 x 139's and 1 x 189 in Karratha , I think that's it in offshore now , some 92's , 139's and a 189 all returned in last year, Babcock has 2 x 92's , 2 x 175's and 5 x 139's on 4 different contracts in 4 locations.

CHC has 2x AW189 in KTA. The 2 H175s for Babcock are in Dili, not Australia. Is Babcock really losing $19m in Australia?

[Apate]

The timing of the article is curious. Couple of big contracts close to award time. Misrepresent what was said. Sow the seeds of doubt in some minds. Surely not.

Mmm, it does make you wonder. Is it a really bad written piece of journalism, or is there a deliberate attempt to place misinformation into the public domain?

The February Trading Update, available from the Babcock website, states (with my emphasis):
"Oil and gas continues to be a tough market. The three large providers of helicopter services who operate worldwide in oil and gas have all emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection with reduced debt and written-down assets. This has effectively reset global market pricing levels, forcing us to respond quickly to remain competitive. We will also exit our oil and gas businesses in Ghana and Congo."

It appears there's no stated intent to exit O&G, just exit business in Africa. Very different to the clickbait headline generated by FlightGlobal :ugh:

[Dirtnap]

There doesn't seem to be a story here other than Babcock isn't planning to bid any new contracts.

I'm curious: are CHC, PHI, and BRS actually bidding or flying in Ghana and Congo? Or is Babcock losing out to more local players?

[domperry76]

Mmm, it does make you wonder. Is it a really bad written piece of journalism, or is there a deliberate attempt to place misinformation into the public domain?

The February Trading Update, available from the Babcock website, states (with my emphasis):
"Oil and gas continues to be a tough market. The three large providers of helicopter services who operate worldwide in oil and gas have all emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection with reduced debt and written-down assets. This has effectively reset global market pricing levels, forcing us to respond quickly to remain competitive. We will also exit our oil and gas businesses in Ghana and Congo."

It appears there's no stated intent to exit O&G, just exit business in Africa. Very different to the clickbait headline generated by FlightGlobal :ugh:

I hate to dispel rumours of "misinformation" and subterfuge, but it's a report on the trading update, nothing more, nothing less. I'd take offence at the "bad written journalism" line too, if it wasn't so er.... 'bad written'. (And clickbait headline? Hardly.)
Here's a section - one of several, if anyone wants to wade through the transcript of the call - that is, at the very least, very open to interpretation, on Babcock's future in oil and gas:

Robin Speakman - Shore Capital Markets
Just to clarify, it sounds very much like from the statement this morning that you are actually pulling out entirely of aviation in the oil and
gas market. Is that correct? And further to that, the assets that are utilised in oil and gas, you’ve kind of partly answered this but can you
move some of those assets into other areas in aviation? Does that have an impact on next year’s CapEx in aviation and indeed on asset
sales as well?

Archie Bethel
I think the well-run route of oil and gas aviation for us is that we don’t intend to invest further, or stay in that market and I think we’ve been
steadily over the last four years now decreasing the size of that business. So - and I think as we emphasised, last year in the capital markets
theirs is part of adjacent markets, adjacent businesses, we are always looking at what’s the long-term future of that?

[TwoStep]

Mmm, it does make you wonder. Is it a really bad written piece of journalism, or is there a deliberate attempt to place misinformation into the public domain?

The February Trading Update, available from the Babcock website, states (with my emphasis):
"Oil and gas continues to be a tough market. The three large providers of helicopter services who operate worldwide in oil and gas have all emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection with reduced debt and written-down assets. This has effectively reset global market pricing levels, forcing us to respond quickly to remain competitive. We will also exit our oil and gas businesses in Ghana and Congo."

It appears there's no stated intent to exit O&G, just exit business in Africa. Very different to the clickbait headline generated by FlightGlobal :ugh:

You should try listening to the associated webcast all the way through before casting your aspersions. Bethel clearly states that the company has lost a number of major bids, lost considerable money on S-92 leases, and says they will not invest anymore money into the oil and gas business and will complete existing contracts.

[100plus75]

So, this from the quarterly call:

Archi Bethel
I think the well-run route of oil and gas aviation for us is that we don’t intend to invest further, or stay in that market and I think we’ve been steadily over the last four years now decreasing the size of that business. So - and I think as we emphasised, last year in the capital markets theirs is part of adjacent markets, adjacent businesses, we are always looking at what’s the long-term future of that?
In terms of the assets, we don’t - I mean one of the positive things is, we don’t have any at the moment, we don’t have a big issue with excess assets so we’ve done pretty well at getting rid of these as we’ve needed to.
I think on the 225s, we’ve only got the one, so we have reached a - we have redeployed some of these and we’ll continue to look at that as a possibility. The S-92s are a bit different. They’re huge machines, mainly suited to search and rescue. Oil and gas and then search and rescue. We will look at, is there options to deploy these and actually, the writing down of asset - of the lease values helps that process. So we’ll continue to look at - continue to look at those whenever we can.
But I say at the moment, we don’t - we expect them to be in contract. Their written down values, we expect them to be on contracts in Aberdeen.
Okay, well once again, thank you for joining the call this morning. I think overall, the business is in good shape. I think the numbers that we have confirmed in guidance today are pretty much in line with what we said they would be.
We’re being pretty upfront about the continuing issues in oil and gas and I think we have acted very quickly to address that so they should not have an impact - any long-term impact on the business and that’s the most important thing. We’ll update you on all of this at the year end in May so thank you again for joining us this morning.
Ends
5 February Trading Update 2020 Babcock International Group PLC

[Apate]

You should try listening to the associated webcast all the way through before casting your aspersions. Bethel clearly states that the company has lost a number of major bids, lost considerable money on S-92 leases, and says they will not invest anymore money into the oil and gas business and will complete existing contracts.

OK I'll make it easier for you to actually quote some text. Here's a link to the transcript. Care to extract where Bethel states that they are exiting O&G altogether?

https://www.babcockinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Babcock-February-Trading-Update-transcript-12.02.2020.pdf

[helicrazi]

OK I'll make it easier for you to actually quote some text. Here's a link to the transcript. Care to extract where Bethel states that they are exiting O&G altogether?https://www.babcockinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Babcock-February-Trading-Update-transcript-12.02.2020.pdf

See below, highlighted and underlined.

Robin Speakman - Shore Capital Markets Just to clarify, it sounds very much like from the statement this morning that you are actually pulling out entirely of aviation in the oil and gas market. Is that correct? And further to that, the assets that are utilised in oil and gas, you’ve kind of partly answered this but can you move some of those assets into other areas in aviation? Does that have an impact on next year’s CapEx in aviation and indeed on asset sales as well?

Archi Bethel - I think the well-run route of oil and gas aviation for us is that we don’t intend to invest further, or stay in that market and I think we’ve been steadily over the last four years now decreasing the size of that business. So - and I think as we emphasised, last year in the capital markets theirs is part of adjacent markets, adjacent businesses, we are always looking at what’s the long-term future of that? In terms of the assets, we don’t - I mean one of the positive things is, we don’t have any at the moment, we don’t have a big issue with excess assets so we’ve done pretty well at getting rid of these as we’ve needed to. I think on the 225s, we’ve only got the one, so we have reached a - we have redeployed some of these and we’ll continue to look at that as a possibility. The S-92s are a bit different. They’re huge machines, mainly suited to search and rescue. Oil and gas and then search and rescue. We will look at, is there options to deploy these and actually, the writing down of asset - of the lease values helps that process. So we’ll continue to look at - continue to look at those whenever we can. But I say at the moment, we don’t - we expect them to be in contract. Their written down values, we expect them to be on contracts in Aberdeen.

[212man]

I haven’t read the transcript- apologies - but reading what has been extracted my read is they will by default be exiting in a phased manner. They don’t plan to bid on any new contracts and will complete the existing ones, so once they are all completed Babcock will no longer be in the O&G market.

[Apate]

I don't read it as being totally clear cut, more a shot across the bows of the Oil Co's that Babcock won't be a player if things don't change wrt ROI. I'm sure all operator CEOs would make similar statements regarding current rates. It's how that message is put across that will no doubt differ.

Time will of course tell who here has the more correct interpretation :)

[212man]

A shot across the bows? Mmm, that would be like using a potato gun!

[Hedski]

There doesn't seem to be a story here other than Babcock isn't planning to bid any new contracts.

I'm curious: are CHC, PHI, and BRS actually bidding or flying in Ghana and Congo? Or is Babcock losing out to more local players?

Kicked out of Ghana more like. Heliconia have taken over Babcock Italia’s contract in Takoradi, locally believed Babcock had been operating for several years without proper local approvals and getting away with it. Congo same perhaps?

[Blackhawk9]

CHC has 2x AW189 in KTA. The 2 H175s for Babcock are in Dili, not Australia. Is Babcock really losing $19m in Australia?
1 x 189 was handed back late last year and the 175's are part of the Aust operation based in Dili on oz rego with oz crews

[Blackhawk9]

Thanks thought they only had two 189's to start with not three, knew one went back.

[nomorehelosforme]

Is this old news? Seems Babcock are still very much in the market.

https://www.heliopsmag.com/babcock-wins-major-new-north-sea-helicopter-contractBabcock’s Offshore business has secured a new five-year shared contract with three oil and gas operators for helicopter transport in the northern North Sea.

The contract will initially see Babcock operate over 100 helicopter flights each month from Sumburgh in Shetland, on behalf of CNR International, EnQuest and TAQA. Flights are expected to begin on 1 July 2020.

Babcock Offshore Director, Simon Meakins, said: “We are delighted to welcome this new customer group to Babcock Offshore and look forward to working with them. We are committed to delivering the safe and efficient aviation support they require.

[Same again]

The Babcock tactic of threatening to leave the O&G market seems to have worked out very well. Oil companies want as much competition as possible to keep contract prices as marginal as possible.

[SASless]

The way oil prices are going....it is going to be the Oil and Gas Industry that pulls the plug along with its contractors dying on the vine.

When the Russians and Saudi's team up....they make a pretty mean competitor.

[ApolloHeli]

The way oil prices are going....it is going to be the Oil and Gas Industry that pulls the plug along with its contractors dying on the vine.

When the Russians and Saudi's team up....they make a pretty mean competitor.

I actually am curious given the current situation with oil prices - if an operator signed a contract for X years (take Babcock now as an example), does that mean there's guaranteed work / jobs for the length of the contract, or is it possible for the Oil company to sever the deal short of the agreed timeline and as a result some pilot jobs may be cut short?

[Bravo73]

No. Most 2/5/10 year contracts have a 90 day termination clause.

So, in effect, the operators have 3 months worth of actual security.

[industry insider]

No. Most 2/5/10 year contracts have a 90 day termination clause.So, in effect, the operators have 3 months worth of actual security.

Correct, in the last few race to the bottom years, I have seen helicopter companies accept “termination for convenience” clauses with as little as 14 days notice. No wonder no one can finance the purchase of new aircraft now, banks won’t touch offshore helicopters, even pre virus.

[nomorehelosforme]

The way oil prices are going....it is going to be the Oil and Gas Industry that pulls the plug along with its contractors dying on the vine.

When the Russians and Saudi's team up....they make a pretty mean competitor.

SAS,

Even the BBC agree with that! https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-51948269The North Sea oil and gas sector is in a "paper thin" position with oil prices tumbling, the industry has warned.

The supply chain in particular is at risk with cash flows already tight following the 2016 downturn.

Coronavirus and increased supply have led to a "perfect storm", according to Oil and Gas UK (OGUK)

The UK government has pledged to support all businesses during the pandemic and said it was in close contact with OGUK.

The industry wants urgent engagement from ministers so that businesses can access finance.

A decision by the oil-producing cartel OPEC to increase production has pushed prices to below $30 a barrel.

That means companies are beginning to row back on investments which are vital to the supply chain.

[TwoStep]

Bethel repeated his concerned about offshore in the company's 2019 financials. See here: https://www.babcockinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Babcock-FY20-results-transcript-11.06.2020.pdf

The international opportunities now account for 48% of our bidding and pipeline. We have also grown our aerial emergency services businesses across Europe and entered several new territories including Canada, Australia, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. However, oil and gas has been frustrating and disappointing, and as I said earlier we no longer believe it to be an attractive growth opportunity. We will continue to operate the reduced business for value and continue to deliver for our customers but we are not predicting significant growth over the next few years.

[jimf671]

Who knows what will happen with the new reality. Maybe $20 in during pandemics and $200 in between pandemics. We don't know what we don't know yet.

[Variable Load]

We don't know what we don't know yet.

Aww Jim, you've just removed PPrune's very raison d'être ;) ;)

No surprise in Bethel's statement. Although this time he hasn't stated that they are looking to exit O&G, so the message has changed.

[EESDL]

Sounds like Badcock trying the ‘give us a contract or we’ll leave’ tactics again - worked last time

[Variable Load]

Sounds like Badcock trying the ‘give us a contract or we’ll leave’ tactics again - worked last time

Yeah right, that's what wins contracts in a market that's oversupplied. If one goes down I don't think it would make a huge difference to their cost base.

Somehow I think you understimate the intelligence of the O&G companies!

[helicrazi]

Babcock withdraws from O&G (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/06/21/babcock-grounds-helicopter-division-nightmare-six-years/)

Shocking comments for O&G from the big man

[tu154]

You just have to wonder what’s on his mind, it’s almost Trump like in his comments. Does he want the offshore business to succeed?

Not sure about the accuracy of the article, refers to the winding down of the business when it was a writing down of the value. It’s definitely not ‘grounded‘.

[vee_why]

it’s almost Trump like in his comments

..or Gerald Ratner. Bethel seems to revel in talking down the very business he is supposed to lead. He appears to take the view that the poor results have absolutely nothing to do with him as CEO. Yet under his realm as CEO the share price has tanked and I'm really surprised he has not been ousted more quickly by the shareholders.

[belly tank]

Babcock withdraws from O&G (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/06/21/babcock-grounds-helicopter-division-nightmare-six-years/)

Shocking comments for O&G from the big man

Can someone please paste the article if they have it. Link above is locked.

[XA290]

Full article:-It’s a nightmare of a business. I think we are doing a great thing putting it behind us. Maybe I should be getting a medal for getting us out of it,” said Babcock boss Archie Bethel as he drew a line under the company’s helicopter operations serving the oil and gas sector.

Winding down the operation that provides crews and supplies to rigs mainly in the North Sea meant charges of £540m for Babcock, the company said earlier this month.

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. Six years ago the purchase of aviation business Avincis (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/engineering/10737633/Babcock-agrees-1.6bn-deal-for-helicopter-firm-Avincis.html) was being trumpeted by Babcock – the biggest in the history of the company best known for its work maintaining military equipment.

Then chief executive Peter Morgan, who Bethel took over from in 2016, proudly talked about how the acquisition from private equity groups KKR and Investindustrial was “15 months in the making”.

Babcock paid £920m and took on £700m of Avincis’s debt for the business, which had a fleet of 350 aircraft servicing the oil and gas industry, as well as providing emergency services such as air ambulances and rescue helicopters along with police contracts.

“Avincis meets our strategic objectives as it brings into Babcock a market-leading business, delivering mission critical services and complex engineering support to blue-chip customers in multiple geographies,” said Morgan. “Avincis already has a strong growth platform and combining it with Babcock will generate even greater expansion opportunities and value creation.”

Buying Avincis was seen as a way of lessening Babcock’s dependence on the cash-strapped Ministry of Defence (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/05/23/babcock-shrugs-outsourcing-worries-deliver-record-profits/) for work, while entering new and lucrative sectors away from the UK.

At the time analysts questioned whether Babcock had overpaid, with the company launching a £1.1m rights issue to fund the deal.

But even before the deal completed in 2014, it faced trouble. With negotiations under way in November 2013, a police helicopter operated by Avincis crashed into a Glasgow pub, killing 10 and injuring 30. Babcock took on liabilities for the crash, thought to be several million.

In hindsight, it could have been seen as an omen. As the deal completed, oil was priced at $111 a barrel – around the level it had traded at for the previous four years. But within a few months, a barrel of the black stuff fell to about $45, and has yet to recover (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/04/20/oil-price-crash-people-paying-give-away/)to anywhere near the previous highs.

As the energy industry contracted, so did demand for helicopters to transport oil rig workers – a business that represented about a third of Avincis’s operations.

Troubles intensified 2016. An H225 helicopter – a variant of those that formed the backbone of Babcock’s fleet serving the North Sea – flown by one of its rivals crashed, killing all 13 people on board. While investigators determined what caused the crash in which the rotors separated from the helicopter, H225s were grounded.

Even after they were cleared for flight in 2017, rig workers’ reluctance to board them and overcapacity in the market meant they remained under-utilised.
In the meantime, Babcock’s competitors serving the North Sea were having troubles of their own. Rival CHC went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2016, wiping clean its debt and writing down its assets, with fellow players PHI and Bristow taking a similar course in the following years. Without the same burdens on their balance sheets, they were able to undercut Babcock.

Hinting at the trouble the company faced, in May 2018 Babcock entered a legal battle with Sikorsky over a £53m deal to buy two new helicopters. Babcock tried to cancel the order, abandoning the £2.5m pre-delivery payments, with the manufacturer fighting the cancellation.

At Babcock’s interim results this February (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/02/12/market-reportprofit-blow-weighs-babcock-shares/), Bethel announced £85m of writedowns, largely related to its aviation operations and said there was a “price war in the sector which we don’t want to enter”.

Just how bad the market was for Babcock was highlighted by its North Sea fleet being more than halved to about 15 aircraft. Writedowns on helicopters by its rivals cut their values, meaning the company was paying more to lease helicopters than they were worth.

But buying Avincis hasn’t been a complete disaster, even though Bethel admitted to The Telegraph two years ago (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/06/09/babcock-boss-archie-bethel-will-rely-imported-workers-years/) that “we would have bought it without the [oil and gas operations] if we could – there were some pretty racy forecasts for the oil price”.

A major attraction of Avincis was its “HEMS” – helicopter emergency services – which allowed Babcock to lessen its reliance on the MoD contracts, and win work overseas.

For all the problems in oil and gas aviation, this has paid off. When it bought Avincis, 90pc of Babcock’s revenues were in the UK – a level now been reduced to about 70pc.

Most of this is down to the HEMS business, with contracts providing rescue and air ambulance services across Europe, including some fixed-wing aircraft performing airborne firefighting duties using “waterbombing” aircraft.

Under Babcock’s stewardship, the former Avincis business has also grown, with revenues rising from about £470m at the time to £750m.

Foreign aviation operations have also opened doors into military work beyond the UK. Two years ago the company landed an 11-year €500m deal to help train military pilots for the famously protectionist French, and is discussing similar deals with other European nations, work which Babcock credits to establishing its credentials with its HEMS operations.

For all the costs and controversy related to buying Avincis, it may prove that Babcock landed a good deal. But even before the deal completed in 2014, it faced trouble. With negotiations under way in November 2013, a police helicopter operated by Avincis crashed into a Glasgow pub, killing 10 and injuring 30. Babcock took on liabilities for the crash, thought to be several million.

In hindsight, it could have been seen as an omen. As the deal completed, oil was priced at $111 a barrel – around the level it had traded at for the previous four years. But within a few months, a barrel of the black stuff fell to about $45, and has yet to recover (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/04/20/oil-price-crash-people-paying-give-away/)to anywhere near the previous highs.

As the energy industry contracted, so did demand for helicopters to transport oil rig workers – a business that represented about a third of Avincis’s operations.

Troubles intensified 2016. An H225 helicopter – a variant of those that formed the backbone of Babcock’s fleet serving the North Sea – flown by one of its rivals crashed, killing all 13 people on board. While investigators determined what caused the crash in which the rotors separated from the helicopter, H225s were grounded.

Even after they were cleared for flight in 2017, rig workers’ reluctance to board them and overcapacity in the market meant they remained under-utilised.

In the meantime, Babcock’s competitors serving the North Sea were having troubles of their own. Rival CHC went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2016, wiping clean its debt and writing down its assets, with fellow players PHI and Bristow taking a similar course in the following years. Without the same burdens on their balance sheets, they were able to undercut Babcock.

Hinting at the trouble the company faced, in May 2018 Babcock entered a legal battle with Sikorsky over a £53m deal to buy two new helicopters. Babcock tried to cancel the order, abandoning the £2.5m pre-delivery payments, with the manufacturer fighting the cancellation.

At Babcock’s interim results this February (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/02/12/market-reportprofit-blow-weighs-babcock-shares/), Bethel announced £85m of writedowns, largely related to its aviation operations and said there was a “price war in the sector which we don’t want to enter”.

Just how bad the market was for Babcock was highlighted by its North Sea fleet being more than halved to about 15 aircraft. Writedowns on helicopters by its rivals cut their values, meaning the company was paying more to lease helicopters than they were worth.

But buying Avincis hasn’t been a complete disaster, even though Bethel admitted to The Telegraph two years ago (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/06/09/babcock-boss-archie-bethel-will-rely-imported-workers-years/) that “we would have bought it without the [oil and gas operations] if we could – there were some pretty racy forecasts for the oil price”.

A major attraction of Avincis was its “HEMS” – helicopter emergency services – which allowed Babcock to lessen its reliance on the MoD contracts, and win work overseas.

For all the problems in oil and gas aviation, this has paid off. When it bought Avincis, 90pc of Babcock’s revenues were in the UK – a level now been reduced to about 70pc.

Most of this is down to the HEMS business, with contracts providing rescue and air ambulance services across Europe, including some fixed-wing aircraft performing airborne firefighting duties using “waterbombing” aircraft.

Under Babcock’s stewardship, the former Avincis business has also grown, with revenues rising from about £470m at the time to £750m.

Foreign aviation operations have also opened doors into military work beyond the UK. Two years ago the company landed an 11-year €500m deal to help train military pilots for the famously protectionist French, and is discussing similar deals with other European nations, work which Babcock credits to establishing its credentials with its HEMS operations.

For all the costs and controversy related to buying Avincis, it may prove that Babcock landed a good deal.

[EESDL]

Yeah right, that's what wins contracts in a market that's oversupplied. If one goes down I don't think it would make a huge difference to their cost base.

Somehow I think you understimate the intelligence of the O&G companies!

sorry - tongue removed from cheek....

[rogue leader]

The Telegraph have edited their misleading headline and Energy People haven't caught up:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/06/21/babcock-grounds-helicopter-division-nightmare-six-years/

https://flipboard.com/article/babcock-grounds-helicopter-division-after-nightmare-six-years/a-Q7_gBsvaQI26k4uSOg7i4g%3Aa%3A3199678-6fd70085ba%2Fco.uk