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

kim - took the words out of my mouth. What we need is a million pictures for Barney to look at - after all a picture paints a thousand words, then he can count the words. Not sure SEO top management are going to take you seriously asking how many is a billion - the answer may come back "billiards"!

BTW did you know that a US pint and gallon are both 4/5ths of an English one?

sd

BTW did you know americans wear ten gallon hats on two pint heads?

My question about 500-600 machines was no misunderstanding - here's the quote from Howard White in yesterday's results:-

"I would like to give some indication of our potential market, especially in the US. We are evaluating one tray, for one customer that has a current usage of 1.5 billion units per annum.
Each tray weighs approx 50 grams and therefore consumes around 75,000 tonnes of
(non-environmentally friendly) plastic a year. It would require between 500 and
600 tray lidders to seal just these trays. We are able to offer a complete
solution through the supply chain."

Either we are talking about lidded trays (which is not any Macdonalds that I go to) or Howard's being a bit elliptical with the truth that the machines refer to the same customer as the trays.

sd

sd
I have a feeling that McDonalds are more interested in boxes for handing over the counter, not lidded trays, so are a separate entity - I hope so because that would possibly be an even bigger market when taking into consideration all the fast food outlets throughout the world.
kim

SD,

Not sure where people have got the link between the 1.5bn trays and McD's. It was simply stated that said tray was being evaluated, no mention of sector/bsuiness, and it would take between 500 & 600 tray lidders to seal them.

It was put forward as an indication of market size, and in typical SEO style, just and evaluation, nothing more!

This alludes to the fact that revenue from this one tray could be:

1: Materials: 75,000 tonnes x ~$2,000 per 1000 tonnes = $150m pa.
2: Licences: 500 x say annual licence of $25k = $12.5m
3: Machines: Sounds like they would be new ones as statement was "it would take" therefore SEO get percentage of GS ready machine cost $xm

So from a single tray, there is a potential revenue stream of >$100m PA.

We've been here many times before....SHOW US THE MONEY!!

On the McD front, and me being a cynical sod again.
Don't McD use cardboard for their boxes and trays and waxed cardboard for their drinks?
If this is the case there is no pressing need I can think of to go from biodegradable, cheap, very easy to store and print boxes to any form of plastic carton or tray.
Someone tell me I am wrong, please, but the only immediate use I can think of is the transportation of foodstuffs to each outlet, and the benefit of Starpol / Greenseal to keep them fresh longer and thereby reduce the number of deliveries.
You take my point? McD outlets biggest cost is real estate costs. I am pretty certain they will have no desire to scrap flat sheet boxes that some spotty student pops into shape for premoulded cartons and trays that will take up very expensive space to store.
Am I going down the wrong track here?
Alan

Alan,

Discussed a while back, I believe on FYB. Someone put forward a good case for the move back to a polymeric material in terms of aesthetics.

Having just indulged in a McD's {v. late lunch} I would say that the biopolymer product would be more convenient for the consumer.

Alan
McD's cardboard boxes don't biodegrade, they lurk in hedges, bus shelters, back streets etc for months! A Starpol box would disappear quickly; it may be possible to produce them in flat packs but stacked trays would not take up much more room. The downside might be that people would be chucking them out of car windows all over the place, knowing they would biodegrade fast. Could give a whole new meaning to fast food!
kim

Edit

Just recieved an e-mail reply from SEO about the 2 machine question.
Doesn't say much other than affirming they have only converted 2 machines and pointing out why.
It goes on to say Asda have worked with them to resolve it as they are keen to get the 200 in, hopefully by the end of this year.
I did put the whole e-mail on, but then edited it out because the mail contains a warning not to post it anywhere.
Anyone who wants it can have it, if they let me have their e-mail address.
Alan

Thanks for the sarky post stockdog.

My reason for asking about the billion meaning was i am getting used to this company saying we have a deal here there and everywhere and rather overegging the pudding and seo saying they are talking to someone about 1.5 billion trays is another example of this, we now all assume its Mcds and run around thinking we have mcds in the bag.

Still holding since 3p

Barney, Oily.
Let me know if you didn't get 'em!!!
Alan

alan, got it thanks and sent a reply thanking you, do not like the first sentence but generally positive i guess, seems the exclusivity will be extended.

Cheers

So its a six month delay at ASDA, not a two month as a broker's note was quoted as saying.

I read the 'customer' having a 500-600 machine supply chain in the US being Walmart, not Mcdonalds, as has been mentioned, and wouldnt have a obvious requirement for Greenseal. Although 1.5 billion trays is a lot......strange........surely McD's dont need Greenseal.

I'd appreciate a copy of that note if you'd send it alan-cheers!

hopefully by the end of this year.

halfamil,
your e-mail failed!!!
Alan

Alan thanks for that .I wish these people would write in clear english.What does she mean by"the longevity of the tooling".Does she mean"the time taken to convert"or is there a problem with the "lifespan of the tooling".Any ideas?

I think she means the lifespan. If it were the time to convert then there would be real problems. I believe the issue to be part of the retrofit equipment not being reliable enough and wearing out too quickly.
That would account for a full stop at 2, whereas lengthy conversion times would mean we had more than 2, just not as many as we would have liked!!
Alan

IAs Alan said I beleive it was requested not to post any of it anywhere, which bit didn't you understand about that Mad Pad? I guess that's why you have problems understanding the wording of the email.

Alan, I'd be wary of distributing that email freely. I guess if it was from Stanelco to yourself then that's how it should remain. My main concern is that if it is seen that private communications in good faith cannot be trusted then it makes it alot harder for private investors to get genuine answers to our questions (if we have any).

Just a thought.

Biscuit

Actually biscuit, you made me read the caveat on the end and that makes it clear that as named recipient I can send it on or report its contents. It is those not named as recipient who are bound not to copy it.
Alan