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

Good post Eric

2.5 years (my holding) is certainly not short term, Eric, and others here have been in much longer.

I dont think you can blame investors for thinking too short a term when you look at the RNS's over the past two years. 200 ASDA conversions were as good as promised by now, promised by SEO management, not by us investors! We have judged the 'real value' based on, amongst other things, the noises made by SEO themselves in various RNS's.

There were a whole series of RNS's last year that, IMO, misled investors and caused us to overvalue the share. The RNS's always implied a quicker timetable than 'long term'.

I disagree with your final sentence - it isn't the investors who need to 'grow up', its the SEO management who have ramped the share and failed to deliver. Isn't it time we stopped making excuses for them?

At last someone not talking BOLLOCKS.
good post eric.

oblo. Happy with your comments and point of view - you're not included in any implied criticism of the short-term view. Yes, management definitely were too optimistic in terms of their timescale. My point is that this is recognised in Philip Lovegrove's statement - I am prepared to take this at face value and let matters unfold at a more pedestrian pace. We each need to ask ourselves whether our own mindset is in tune with the reality of Stenalco in their selected market. In going for such a large market they have, possibly unwittingly, given themselves a mountain to climb for which they have possibly just established base camp. The rewards are potentially great but the timescales inevitably long. My point is proved, I believe, by looking back at the considerable progress made in the last year but which almost looks like running fast to stand still. No doubt they will change gear sometime, hopefully not too far ahead, but I don't think I can read when and I wonder whether they can.

Eric

Well, I had a look at their report from 2003 where they talked about their plans to transform the business. 3 years down the line I think it's hard to criticise what has been achieved, granted, there is still alot to do, but when you look at where we are now as opposed to 3 years ago, you realise the real quality of the management of this company. Just my view of course.

Biscuit

Well, lets hope they change gear before the money runs out. Planning long-term is fine if you can get the backing long term. Too pedestrian a pace and backers will run away!

My entrance into this little debate was made because I was unimpressed with Duggans response (or total lack of) to my email once I had offered him evidence of 'leaks' before an RNS. You must make your own mind up and read into that what you will. It's certainly made me see the management in a different way.

This post is pure comedy, the friction between rhymans and Oilyboy.
Pinnacle, I dont seem to remember the tone of this thread ever having the justification to be positive, until something actually happens.

Thanks Eric and Oblo for provoking the timely reflection.

I'm curious as to what will happen when the exclusivity period runs out with ASDA, will the other supermarkets beat a path to SEO's door?????

gary: it would be helpful if one of our industry insiders could give an opinion on your question. ASDA will presumably be making a song and dance once the roll out is seriously under way. It may be that the others will have no real option but to follow.

I said that I did not think that now is the time for any more conjecture, but now I am going to do some more conjecturing! I have received a belated reply from Sylvia Leavey confirming that the calendar has been changed: I had pointed out that the website Home page was misleading at first glance, seeming to show that SEO signed a binding contract with ASDA in March this year and suggesting that it was made clearer. Sylvia made no comment about that - could it be that the page will be updated after the Interims are released and that it will give a list of contracts now signed including ASDA, WM, McD? Just a thought.
kim

Kim I fear you are clutching at straws ,but I hope not.

Golden straws Mad Pad!!
kim

Oblo,

Having failed to receive your e-mail re: Leaks, I've PM'd you on FYB and included my hotmail address.

Would greatly appreciate your info.

Garyble.

Thanks for your message GD Potts!

A prefer to take a positive approach rather than a doomsday one - after all if you take a pessimistic view then don't invest!

By investing in companies you have to have a positive approach otherwise what is the point.

As I said people love bad news rather than good - very sad but it's a fact - is it good or bad that sells nespapers?

I am fully aware of the difficulties Stanelco have in dealing with large companies - I have the same in my business.

I don't think that people who have no experience in business fully understand the protracted nature of dealing with these corporations - patience will be rewarded.

If anyone is looking for a quick buck then investing in companies is not the way to do it - indeed anything worthwhile is usually worth the wait.

We can only hope Pinnacle.

Helpful post, pinnacle. The larger the company, the more protracted the negotiation. Essentially, with a relatively small company you can get to the decision maker or the key influencer. With the larger company the guy appears important and is in a relative sort of way but there can be so many hurdles to crack. What, for instance, is the level of autonomy in ASDA for decision making. How are decisions made in WalMart and where is the real power. OK, you may have the blessing as a key 'green' supplier but who holds the purse strings. It may be that the guy has the authority to initiate a trial but not spending real money.

The other side of teh coin is that ASDA were prepared to sanction the effort where, presumably, their competitors were not. Stanelco just have to move forward where they can. My point is that it is very difficult to prejudge the timescales. But once the ship starts moving forward in real terms, just think about the momentum!

Eric

Thanks for the posts Potts and Robson.

One thing that doesn't seem to get mentioned - but would solve all financial concerns is the sale of the cigarette filter!

This one product could change everything on it's own!

Your posts Robson are always informative and well thought out - keep it going!!

All of us want the same thing - let's hope we are rewarded.

Good Luck to all.

pinnacle

I have no news of the fag butts since the AGM. At that I made the following notes -

Rothschilds were working on a "no sale, no fee" basis which shows their faith in getting a worthwhile result for themselves.

It is a process with several stages -

Stage 1, Identify potential customers. Various parties had shown "significant interest".
Stage 2, Further development still had to be completed. Biotec are working with Adept Polymers in Warrington on necessary development and testing "still proving the Patents and materials".
Stage 3, comes after all this "but don't hold your breath".

Tony

A reminder of what has been said about the ciggy filters:-


Biodegradable cigarette filters developed in UK

A biodegradable cigarette filter has been developed that is said to be
better for smokers as well as the environment. The filters are made from
food-grade starch, the carbohydrate polymer in foods such as potatoes
and rice.
The British company that is developing them, Southampton-based Stanelco,
which already makes biodegradable packaging, says it is in talks with
cigarette manufacturers in Europe, North America and Asia about using
them to replace existing filters.

"There is no safe cigarette, but that doesn't mean that they should not
be cleaner and greener," says Howard White, Stanelco's president.
Stanelco says the butts will decompose in just two months, whereas
existing filters made of the synthetic polymer cellulose acetate never
biodegrade, creating 500,000 tonnes of pollution a year around the
world. The company also claims that the filters should be better for
smokers' health as any fragments that end up in the lung will degrade
more quickly, although it has not published any studies to support this.


"It doesn't alter the fact that the main product is still going to be as
deadly as ever" Amanda Sandford from ASH said. It also means that
cigarettes can't be thrown away just because the butts will decompose,
Ms Sandford when on to say "We need to change the mindset of smokers so
butts are disposed of properly."

New Scientist 7/10/05
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/mg18825202.800 (full article
is available to subscribers)

kim

Kim, smoking is an anti green habit so can't imagine that smokers will give too hoots one way or the other about Stanelcos new filter. Tobacco companies may adopt the new filter if costs can be cut only. I can't imagine Gordon Brown will allow any tax relief for businesses using green filters so at the end of the day manufactures will continue to control the market which ultimatly is controlled by the smoker. Should these green filters affect the 'draw', taste, or start to decompose should any slightly wet tobacco be used in the rolling process consumers will steer well clear and ultimatly the filter won't sell...... Alot at risk and hardly the money spinner SEO has tried to create for release of the product!!