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

baza

Considering that damages could wipe out this company i'd suggest you start looking more closely at the case.

considering that damages are an unknown , i'd suggest you stop posting such assenine remarks.

ssanebs - 25 Oct 2005 08:16 - 12182 of 12308
SEO PRE-CLOSE TRADING STATEMENT ON FRIDAY.


DOH!

Anyone seen ssanebs recently?

Was that a statement or a question - Have we established whether we are expecting anything today - personally I doubt it - but !!!

Bema,

I have seen several mentions of the pre close statement, none refuted. Look at post 11235 from Phart68. But as said in my previous post ( as far as we can be sure from several posts ). I added the bracketed statement to show that I am not certain, and did not wish to mislead. I am now beginning to suspect the so called pre close statement could be a red herring/rumor. If it is a rumor, it looks like I possible fell for it, and as I am always sceptical, this would be a rare occurence. If I have mislead anyone, my apologies.

ok Greekman - you are fired

Baza

Well its back to job hunting then. I wonder if SEO have any vacancies, re sales staff.
Greekman

no prob greekman,

I've seen all the suggestions as well, but unless i can find an official source it's all rumour to me. I'm happy to wait for the starpol trials and FDA test results to come through in their own time......

Cheers, Bema,

This was the first ( and last ) time I post anything seen without checking the source as best I can. A leason for all perhaps. Like you not worried and happy to bide my time.

An interesting end to the day !

T uesday tomorrow

Not Stanelco specific - but hearing from brokers generally that "shorts" getting well squeezed on today's markets.

mmm interesting price move there

Suprised no one else commented on the little known fact that Greenseal can infact be "easy peel" as well as cut to open as NielsJensen mentioned in posts 12302 & 12303 (So good he said it twice). This had been rumour and speculation for months on this thread with no conclusive proof and there it was in the powerpoint presentation and only Neils picked up on it. Well done.
This is a huge plus and should be celebrated. I`ll except the sudden jump in SP at the end of the day as my way of celebration. Obe

Obe2konobi
Are you Neils wife?

From the presentation. T he cost of starpol 3000 is comparable to polypropylene. Am I get muddled or does this mean it is comparable to pertol based plastics ( if so didnt PM get banned for saying this)
Apologies if Im wrong
Lindos!

No he did not get banned for saying that specifically - but he did say it - but it was not backed up by the statement that was issued at the time - I suspect he already had the information which came out a few days later substantiating the fact that it would be as cheap - if not cheaper due to renrgotiated contracts and increased volumes

baza

It does make you realise how good his research could be!!
Lindos

His research is absolutely first class - its just that he does get carried away and sometimes he embelleshes the information with stuff that is not in the public domain and sometimes he exaggerates. Sometimes he is spot on

As always with Pauls material - it is a question of getting to know the guy and recognising the good stuff and seperating it from the fiction.

Baza

'It does make you realise how good his research could be!!
Lindos '

Except that he was quoting from an RNS at the time, and misquoted it by stating the exact opposite to what was in the RNS!

Slt Greekman . When BHunt told you were fired. he was not joking . Only variable left to discuss is whether the deed be done by Firing squad or literally by fire . .Your counsel in mitigation suggests because it is your first offence you should merely have your tongue ripped out....Something which a top city barrister QC on 3k an hour could ill afford i suppose. .... ,,, A Very similar case to BPRG and SEO was settled only last week . Punitive damages were minimal as no percuiary advantage had been made by the offending party ; but charges after 7 weeks of litigation ( virtually the same duration of SEO ) the costs amounted to in excess of $3 million .......,,,,,gulp ...........and now SEO want to incur more costs at the Court of Appeal . ,,,,,,bigger gulp ..BPRG are iinsured: SEO are not. Can any legal hack tell us of costs incurred at the High Court on a daily basis .Last l heard it was7 to 10k PER HOUR to run the damned places ... Or can we ask for time to pay like the crims >< ...No company irrespective of size . likes to watch 3m eaten up by additional operational legal costs . ..l fear those legal costs will come back to haunt us . SEO are spread very thin now. Finishing on a note of levity -- The American website...lol Probably the work of PM ......