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

A company called Phoqus pharma comes to Aim very soon, they make gelatin free capsules, I've noted the following as part of their marketing drive; would it suggest to anyone that the Ingel/Cardinal deal is dead in the water?

To assist the delivery of its strategy, Phoqus has entered into a strategic alliance with Cardinal Health, Inc. (''Cardinal Health''), a leading provider of products and services supporting the health care industry with a turnover of approximately $74 billion, for the active co-marketing of Phoqus' drug delivery and image systems in all major markets. Cardinal Health will also provide commercial scale GMP manufacturing to Phoqus' collaboration partners. This alliance is an important step in moving the Company towards commercial operation.

fwiw I don't think it would be a bad thing if it was dead as they have enough on there plate without it and the patents are as good as lost.

Any comments?

Resistance at 13.75 with 1:6 @ 13.5 : 13.75 and 25k v 660k

Starpol is for short shelf life so there may well be a warning on the package re similar to many others, whats the problem! Most packaging carries several warning IE sell by date, use by date, microwaveable, piece lid etc. One of the reasons re Starpol's invention is due to it being biodegradable, so its not much use if it lasts forever is it. For long term packaging it will obviously not be used.

Re: Pauls post:-

'paulmasterson1 - 12 Oct 2005 12:58 - 11246 of 11255


Stanelco believes its Starpol 2000 range of materials will be able to significantly undercut the price of polyester whilst providing the necessary gas barrier for MAP sealing. '

This is what the RNS actually says:-

'It is substantially less expensive than most other biodegradable packaging materials and not significantly greater than conventional plastics.'

You're at it again Paul. The RNS says its more expensive than plastic, so why do you say its less expensive?

Have to agree with Oblo Paul - naughty, naughty - you must stop that - it does your credibility irreparable harm

baza

Baza Hi,

My cred is intact, e-mail me if your in any doubt about my claims, as can everyone if they so wish :)

Cheers,
PM

but PM, your posts are factually misleading, or was that above an honest error?

How do you get cred ?

By having a thorough knowledge of what you are talking about, and referrring back to the facts ....


Reasons why todays announcement is of huge value ....

KBC Peel Hunt 06/09/2005

The prospects for Biotecs products are truly exciting as they offer
the only commercially viable biodegradable alternative to the
plastics being used in the packaging industry. More importantly it
will also generate very real profits. Furthermore the prospects for
the groups GREENSEAL technology remain strong. Following the
successful completion of the third trial, the 12 month exclusivity
agreement has started and we anticipate the roll-out programme
to start in earnest once the initial machines have been
commissioned and signed off.

Biotec is already forecast to be strongly profitable in the first
full year of ownership. The deal recently announced with the
groups jv partner SP Metal should ensure that the group is
profitable in the first year. Initial projections suggest the contract
will generate around 4m of EBIT and we anticipate that additional
deals will be announced over the coming months. In our numbers
we have attempted to be prudent and have assumed that around
15,000 tonnes of product will be sold in the first twelve months (the
SP Metal deal already covers 10,000 of this total).

Long-term opportunity for Biotec probably exceeds that of
GREENSEAL. The use of plastics in the food industry is clearly
extensive and is also an integral part. Until now there has been no
viable naturally biodegradable alternative to the likes of
polypropylene or APET. The introduction of Starpol 2000 (Biotecs
core product) changes this. Price is an issue, however the price
premium for Starpol 2000 is only 10-20% and as the product
becomes adopted so the price will fall. Additionally, both
Polypropylene and APET prices are linked to the oil price and with
the ever rising price of oil it is unlikely to be long before the pricing
of Starpol 2000 falls below that of the traditional plastics.

Quantifying the potential for Biotec is impossible due to the scale of
the market. However merely replacing all of SP Metals existing
internal requirements would result in a 14-fold increase volumes
from the existing 10,000 tonnes. This would imply a 56m EBIT for
Biotec on a pro-forma basis.

Stronger balance sheet. The recent fund raising and part sale of
Biotec has improved the groups cash position from the start of the
year with a current cash balance of around 7m.

Prospects for Biotec
The group is addressing the global food tray market. To give an indication
of the size of the market in North American Wal-Mart alone purchases
2.5bn food trays per year for red meat only. Each tray, on average, weighs
40g this equates to an annual usage of 100,000 tonnes of plastic (they
presently use polypropylene which is a notoriously poor gas barrier).

Wal-Mart in turn accounts for only 10% of the North American market so a
simple calculation suggests 1m tonnes of plastic is used in red meat
packaging in the North American market.

On a pro-forma basis as per the SP Metal deal this volume would equate
to 2bn of gross income and an EBIT contribution of 400m. Even
assuming that the EBIT margin falls by 75% to 5% then this would still
give 100m of EBIT.

well someone just wiped out the resistance at 13.75

baza

nm

now 2:1 @ 13.5:13.75 and 75k:100k

Sorry Paul - cant agree with you on this one - Oblo posted the RNS saying that Starpol was more expensive than existing oil based products - but cheaper than other bio products. - its in black & white - sorry matey.

But tis of little relevance in the grand scheme of things - but it may be a pointer as to why the conversions are not happening in droves.

baza

PM1

Far be for me to break our truce, but I do think that if someone highlights an inaccuracy in someone else's statements that they should not be asked to continue the dialogue in clearing up the mistake via private e-mail.

If the statement is made on the board, the matter should be resolved on the board.

Please answer the question directly and openly on the board.

The oily one

Whilst I agree re the wording of the RNS, therefore i would like clarification re PM1s post. I wish to point out that Starpol will not be influenced by any rise in oil prices, except of course any transport cost which will effect everything. So in the long term Starpol could be cheaper than conventional plastics. Presumably if Starpol is costlier than conventional plastics at present day prices, the difference must be so small that Asda consider to be insignificant and a better product.

I'm still chomping at the bit over ii's use of the word maximum. Perhaps a more subtle alteration of the RNS, but just as misleading in the opposite direction.
I know ii reads this thread, but he has still not replied to my original question over why he inserted this, or apologised for misleading everyone.
Alan

Paul, what you have posted has nothing to do with and is no answer to the question.

Each time you are challenged for making a misleading post we can be sure Your defence will be to flood the BB with irrelevant rubbish rather than own up, put the record straight and apologise.

I didn't ask you to extol the virtues of Starpol over plastics - I agree with you on that one (aside from the cost).

I asked why you mis-quoted from todays RNS by saying Starpol was less expensive than the plastic equivalent when the RNS says it is more expensive.

Your reply to proptrade is infantile.

You may find you attract more respect by behaving like an adult rather than a 10 year old sometimes and owning up to your errors - assuming it was an error.

.....and actually Oblo - in the post that Paul posted it said :

"Price is an issue, however the price premium for Starpol 2000 is only 10-20% and as the product becomes adopted so the price will fall."

I dont want to get into he said that, I said that - but Paul I think Oblos observation is accurate and correct.

Anyway - lets not get hung up on it - we all anticipate that the unit costs will fall as volume picks up and oil remains expensive.

Nobody is having a go at you Paul - I expect it was a genuine mistake as you were probably thinking more of the long term - when costs will fall , than what the article actually said which related to now.

baza

http://www.sharecast.com/cgi-bin/sharecast/story.cgi?story_id=554043


http://www.sharecast.com/cgi-bin/sharecast/story.cgi?story_id=554113

Baza,

you say 'Nobody is having a go at you Paul' - well I am!

How else can you desribe it? lol! I'm not agreeing with him, am I? Why the pussy-footing around where PM1's concerned?

He makes a misleading or untrue post, behaves like a spoilt child when challenged, wont back down and some of you end up apologising to him rather than the other way round.