for more information about stanelco click on the links.

driver's research page link
http://www.moneyam.com/InvestorsRoom/posts.php?tid=7681#lastread
website link
http://www.stanelco.co.uk/index.htm

snip - major shateholders are :
Ranking Shareholder Holding % Date Prev. Holding Prev. %
1 AGE OF REASON FOUNDATION 227,078,122 25.76% 26/04/05 227,078,122 26.91%
2 RICHARDS & APPLEBY LIMITED 53,819,166 6.10% 26/04/05 55,756,666 6.61%
3 FRAMLINGTON INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT 30,000,000 3.40% 26/04/05 54,166,666 6.42%
4 WATERHOUSE SECURITIES 29,718,119 3.37% 26/04/05 23,099,034 2.74%
5 BARCLAYS STOCKBROKERS LIMITED 27,429,948 3.11% 26/04/05 25,696,826 3.04%

Assumr the last 2 to be nominee accounts

Baza

Age of Reason foundation - controlled by trustees related to the directors?

Yes - Ben White, son of Howard White is the primary beneficiary of The Age of Reason Foundation

only two institutional holders!

Masterson strikes again, or perhaps he was predicting the drop;-)

paulmasterson1 - 07 Oct 2005 09:10 - 10754 of 10798

Trading of 2,266,872 bought and only 115,564 sold, so it's only heading one way later :)

Cheers,
PM

Why are the Age of Reason being mentioned again ?

They aren't selling, so whats the problem ?

Cheers,
PM

Paul - I asked a question twice (copy of my second post reprinted below) and you have declined to answer although I see you have made other posts since I asked the question.

I assume from your failure to answer that you do not have any knowledge of what future RNS's will contain, so why have you attempted to mislead us?

You also said the following in another post:-

Mock all you like about RNS's, or even imply I might have been guessing, but these words are from an E-Mail to me 4 weeks ago ....

"I hope that in the next few weeks we will be able to enlighten the market on just how good Biotec is, and how many gems exist in it."

You are implying that you have inside knowledge about future RNSs. Ive tackled you on some of your wild claims in the past as have others, and you were even banned from FYB for making a similar claim. You seem to be getting carried away again.

I think you should retract the statements made in these two posts and apologise - they were at the very least misleading.

I feel this is a serious matter. Your posts could affect some impressionable investors who may believe from what you say that you have access to privileged information from inside Stanelso.



==========
==========

My earlier unanswered post:-

Paul, you haven't answered my question from above - here it is again:-

Paul wrote:-

'If you think the last few RNS's were impressive, wait until you see the next few :)'

Paul,

do you have some specific knowledge of what will be in 'the next few' (if you do I'm not expecting you to divulge the information here)?

You have to allow for a "woman's" "institution".

Life is not as serious as SEO.

Relax a little.

If some of you are as anxious as you appear to write, you would be wiser not to bet on the smaller markets.

Well said Fred

Baza

PM - because BH1910 listed them for someone who wanted to know what institutions hold the shares. I believe it right to point out that shares controlled by or on behalf of directors are not independent investing institutions.

oblo

He only responds to fluffy posts patting him on the back for being such a good googler so he won't respond to you, I have it on good authority this man works in a vegetable packing factory in admin; no big deal but just goes to show the web of deceit and lies his fantasy world revolves around. Buyer beware when taking any info from this chap as if it's not publicly known stuff it's made up.

oblomov Hi,

You say "I assume" .... assume what you like, whinge about me all you like, and post what you like, I won't be baited by you, just like on FYB when you used to post the same baiting questions and accusations

Everyone here knows how much I have got right or wrong so far on Stanelco, and they can make their own decisions, to believe what I say or not.

I am hardly likely to answer your baiting question, which has only two possible answers, either of which would bring another barrage of finger pointing from you :-

1) I have inside info
2) I don't have inside info


I fully expect you to do just like you did with all your other baiting questions on FYB, and make this into another endless saga, be my guest, the power of squelch is upon you yet again ....

Cheers,
PM

Bones Hi,

Thanks :)

Cheers,
PM

pm1, it's a fair enough question oblomov asked. i was wondering the same thing myself.

How can Paul answer that?!!

Bugz Hi,

How indeed ????

Thats typical of the questions oblomov asked on FYB, whichever answer I give, I either dig myself a big hole, or open myself up to more of those type of questions and insinuations from oblomov.

Cheers,
PM

Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no, please....

Paul made a statement like this: "If you think X is good then wait until you see the next X", this seems to imply he knows what the next X is, but it can also mean that he hopes the next X will be better than the previous. Clearly there is no way he can know what the next X is; so the second interpretation of his language is the correct one.

To be fair though, if he does have inside info, how can anyone expect him to say so!!

Personally I find Pauls 'knowledge' follows pretty closely with my 'understanding' of the Stanelco situation, we only seriously differ over the projected share price in 5 years!!

I also agree with him on the RNS issue. Its only going to get better, not worse.

age of reason

one really weird site. Major shareholder of SEO

I wasn't 'baiting' you Paul, and never have. If you stick your head above the parapet.......

I asked a pertinent question because you made an important statement which I felt should be questioned, which is all I ever did on FYB on I believe the 2 times we 'disagreed'. It is also what the administrators themselves did on FYB and they received the same response as I have received and so banned you for making false and misleading statements.

On every occasion I have seen you asked to justify a suspect statement you have evaded the answer by attacking the questioner.

Why cant you just admit you have no way of knowing what will be in future RNS's and stop misleading people rather than try to make me out to be the 'bad guy'? ?

Niels,

you are not quite correct because of the other of Paul's posts in which he says:-

Mock all you like about RNS's, or even imply I might have been guessing, but these words are from an E-Mail to me 4 weeks ago ....

"I hope that in the next few weeks we will be able to enlighten the market on just how good Biotec is, and how many gems exist in it."

This, when coupled with the other post, implies he is receiving direct information from Stanelco in relation to future RNS's.

'Even imply I might have been guessing' suggests he wasn't guessing but had been told in advance what would be contained in an RNS. Preposterous, thats why it needs to be challenged.