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

Which all brings us back to my post No. 19117 in which I said

'opinions, opinions and more opinions,all based on very few facts, doom and gloom and quite frankly, as far as I'm concerned , a right load of old cobblers because at least 90% of the posters over the past few days have absoulutely zilch knowledge of what is actually happening behind the scenes '



It shouldn't be long before we get some answers and facts, hopefully. Night all.

oblomov - 19 Aug 2006 21:27 - 19146 of 19146

'opinions, opinions and more opinions,all based on very few facts, doom and gloom and quite frankly, as far as I'm concerned , a right load of old cobblers because at least 90% of the posters over the past few days have absoulutely zilch knowledge of what is actually happening behind the scenes '

And that includes you.

Just got back in.

Oilywag, agree with you and selected others.

I agree, not long to wait before all is revealed.

There are certain posters who I respect and others quite frankly enjoy distorting the situation to suit themselves.

This business will have no problems in securing finance.

Letters of intent from the companies involved are not issued on a whim.

Don't think anyone on this thread is 'distorting the situation.' The situation speaks for itself. SP collapsed from 30p to 4p, impressive cash burn, practically nil Greenseal conversions, very little money in the bank, redundancies, change of Board personnel, about 3 changes of NOMAD / Broker. What is there to distort?

On one hand we have a hardcore of holders who think all of the above is but a mere hiccup on the road to success wearing rose coloured spectacles amid claims of confidential information; on the other, those taking a more objective view.

Letters of intent won't pay the wages and it remains to be seen if securing finance is a problem. If they do raise the necessary from sources other than the public, personally I will take that as quite an encouraging sign for the immediate future.

pth

zscrooge,
If you had any inkling of the spadework done by Oily, you would not have made that remark. I am privileged to know what has been happening, reference Oily.
Aldwickk,
Do try to keep up. As I said before, I wish I could share this information, but I cannot. I really don't care what you think of my postings. it would be like caring what an earthworm thinks of my gardening.
Some people have been kind enough to tell me what is going on. Further research shows that they tell the truth. If I shared this now, they would be in huge trouble at work, and I would be in even bigger trouble with the FSA. Same applies if I recommend this stock to anyone, so no amount of juvenile goading will make me tell you.
As I have also stated, what I know cannot be PROVEN and is not RNS, so the possibility remains I have received wrong information, but I am confident that it is accurate and that is about all that matters to me. Take it or leave it.
Alan

Pat, I don't think all of the above is a mere hiccough that can be ignored. But I do know the reasons for much of it, and I am actually quite happy about the board changes. the cash situaution is a little worrying and the greenseal conversion rate is appalling, but that area at least is one I now understand.
I am confident, but not because of rose tints.
Alan

Alan

Strikes me that if you think you could be in trouble with the FSA for sharing your information, then perhaps you already are or at the very least the people who have passed you information are. If it isn't price senstitive then they and you should be ok, I do hope so for your and their's sake.

pth

wtf is Pat?
:-)

slip of the keyboard, mate. ;-)
The people who ahve shared their info would be if I blabbed it and it became common knowledge. As for the FSA, that is not because of anything SEO or sensitive information related, just that my professional and some of my business positions preclude me from offering advice without jumping through flaming hoops, and as I am sure you are aware, I couldn't do that on a BB, and there are certain others who would take great pleasure in dropping me right in it.
Not being enigmatic, or mysterious, or just a good old fashioned ramper trying to bluff a non existant hand. Simply protecting myself.
Anyway,as I keep saying, the info looks very accurate, but if it were wrong, and I had said it were so, then you would have another PM1 on your hands and none of us want that.
Suffice to say i expect things to go very well before christmas, and if the things I believe are true, then funding (if required) should not prove a big hurdle.
Alan

I found the timing of the latest trading statement very strange like most people, no doubt. I have been long on SEO for a long time now. I did speak to Robert Duggan just over a year ago and asked him if the company would think of us shareholders with regard to fundraising because I was fed up with the institutions being offered shares at discounted prices and so diluting my shareholding. His response at the time was along the lines that the company needed to raise finance quickly and that by carrying out a rights issue or open issue it would be more costly and time consuming. Perhaps my request has finally been heeded and that time isn't so critical as it was in the past.

For Alan, any chance of letting me have an inkling into the info that you have?. My email address is raymondhyams@aol.com.

Kind regards

testing 1234

rmhyams

The reason you may get a chance this time is that unless SEO can prove 100% that they are really on the cusp of commercial success then it is unlikley an Institution will touch them. Have to go public I think. Judging by the information that SEO have just released re cash flow, I would say that time is very very critical. Just goes to show that when all those shares were placed with Institutions the excuse that Duggan gave was crap. Mind you it's the institutions who have been shafted as it turns out.

pth

5678

Not seeking the limelight, but I too am aware of what Oily speaks and others both refer and confirm.

My conclusion is that firstly the apparent cash position is of little long term concern and is being addressed, and has been for quite some time, and ALL possibilities are being considered - not just one specific way around this.

Secondly, if [WHEN ;-) ] a contract is signed for any one of several possibilities, the SP will turn around and start an upwards progression that will continue for a very long long period as acceptance and uptake of the various IPs accelerates.

Remember, apart from the Greenseal projections which have been extrapolated much over the last 2 years, each Starpol/MMF JV is planned to generate a minimum income of 4m/pa GROSS, with negligable connected costs. A single deal solves the aparent short term cash situation and puts SEO into actual profit. Where will that leave all the doubters and muppets who have enjoyed themselves so much these last few days?

What when more than one deal is signed? - WELL...

The biggest players in he World are not just interested but actively assisting SEO get their products out there and some have signed Letters of Intent. Something no respected outfit will do lightly.

Those who would have to implement (as opposed to ordering) any initial deal are also eager to be part of the concept and take it far beyond the existing paramaters and expectations.

This share has long been driven by news & hope that has seen (in my period of involvement) a rise from 4p to 30p and a gradual retracement back as further news has not followed. Dont forget the change in approach regarding RNS announcements from when Martin Wagner arrived last November.

Knowing my failing is being over-optimistic, I have very very carefully considered the situation. Following this I bought a further million shares this week and doubt that it will be a bad move in the weeks, months or even years ahead. But that was my decision, based on my interpretation of information available in the public domain. If you do your own research and come up with a different conclusion please share it with us.

We are all here to help each other.

"If you think Stanelco know anything about marketing you are very naive. Would you walk into Sainsburys without researching first their mission statements and consumer policy? Faced with the GM stalemate would you be so totally negative to walk out without finding a compromise? You have to ask yourself - do they really want to sell the product. A good salesperson never walks away without opening a new dialogue - and SEO don't seem to be following up on any of their presentations - that is if they have any professional presentations by their supposed new marketing heavyweights. Perhaps they have lost sight of their priorities with the huge interest they generated with the word 'green'?"My "inside contact "!!!(Sorry oblo)wrote this and tomorrow I am going to visit her facility in Devon ,who as it happens to supply apart from Sainsburys ,Tesco ASDA Waitrose Costco Makro and BHS.Personally I feel that this grass roots at this level research is worth much more than unfounded conjecture on this board.You might think differently.Best rgds all .Mad Pad

Tony if still awake call me now

garyble, the market rules are being enforced more than before. If any company knows that they may need to raise money by issuing shares in a placing, they must inform the market as soon as they know this is the case. There are certain exceptions, where they can claim there was not time or it being done privately, but as a general rule, especially when it comes down to dwindling working cap, they should inform the markets. This one (update via a TU) has happened more than likely as they cannot secure private funding, and need to go ahead with a "Public Equity Issue", the emphasis being on public, which means in all effect that the price could well go down a lot from here until its over and done.

Given past performance by Stanelco on timescales and promises I would take an estimate that the letters of intent are not worthy in the eyes of the privates. A letter of intent is not one way, and it must entail Stanelco also doing something, and there will be the weak link in the LOI's in the eyes of the privates.



garyble - 19 Aug 2006 11:19 - 19125 of 19161
With only 300k cash left at end of April, the situation then appears to have been more dire than it is now, yet no RNS as we've just had.

Could it be that SEO had already secured funding around December? OR is the current, informative update a sign that the new FDA is perhaps a bit more forthcoming with telling it as it is.

The letters of intent from two of the six or so JV partners IMO are essential for the securing of funding as they amount to a potential contribution of ~8m p.a.

sorry, had second thoughts, removed post- as it made identity of source traceable.
Those of you holding, patience will be shown to be a virtue.
VERY HAPPY to HOLD

ZScrooge

Do tell us more. Wouldn't be PM1 would it?

No it wouldnt - and for your information It is probably obvious to regular long-standing
posters here that I was no fan of his. My posts challenging him finally led to him being banned from this BB - look back through the thread if you dont believe it.

There have been many times on this BB when I have been accused of being a basher, now I'm being accused of ramping. My posts have always been based on the information available to me at the time. My recent posts are no exception.

Ptholden

On one hand we have a hardcore of holders who think all of the above is but a mere hiccup on the road to success wearing rose coloured spectacles amid claims of confidential information; on the other, those taking a more objective view.

It is arrogant of you to assume that those who think all of the above is but a mere hiccup on the road to success are not taking an objective view whilst you are. Im being totally objective because Im considering the information available to me and looking at the larger picture ,weighing up the negative with the positive. Some people only seem to be able to focus on one or the other.

I'd like to make it clear that my recent positive posts are NOT intended to suggest anyone not holding invests in SEO, or even that any holders add to their holdings. This share must still be seen as very high risk. My posts are, as are those of many other posters here I believe, intended as reassurance to other holders who are committed.

Several of us have invested a lot of money in SEO, some much more than me. These are tough times, no doubt about it. We need reassurance, but only if it is merited, and I truly believe it is.

Those who are in the know and there seems to be more poping up every day, the one thing they don't know is how the share price will react when all is revealed, how many times as a company posted so called good news and the share price as dropped ?

Lets have a guess now, ASDA sign a letter of indent or/and put money upfront of orders. Any deal or funding will come at a cost to SEO [ beggars can't be chooses ]