bosley
- 20 Feb 2004 09:34
stockdog
- 29 Sep 2006 20:33
- 20532 of 27111
Soul trader - by expansion I meant production, not acquisition, and specifically jv production of Starpol. But if as much as 15m at 1p is needed now, why on earth did they raise only 3.8m in June at 8p, when they must have known how much would be needed for production jv's even if they were unaware of operating cashflow porblems at that stage. Seems verging on negligence to have so miscalculated only so recently. The high need now cannot have arisen only out of events of the succeeding 3 months. I would have thought nearer 8m @ 1p now and more @ 5p (?) in 6 months time when cashflow has stabilised and contracts clearly signed.
sd
bhunt1910
- 30 Sep 2006 13:51
- 20533 of 27111
I suspect that they felt confident of signing contrsct when they raised the cash at 8p and did not want to dilute the sp any more than they had too.
My view is that they miscalculated the time required to get the contracts signed off and found themselves in shit street again.
More examples of niave and inexperienced management playing in the big pond and being taught some harsh business lessons. I had hoped that this new finance director was going to put a bit of backbone in this management team. Time will tell.
My judgement is that they will not go broke, will not get suspended and will get contracts signed in the nick of time to keep them in business - they will then start a long recovery process - similar to what Ashtead have done over the last 3 years when they rose from 3p to 200p - and they should know all about that as the SEO chairman is a director of Ashtead.
maestro
- 30 Sep 2006 14:05
- 20534 of 27111
hmm.. 1.5p to 100p would do for me...nice little 40 bagger
KingKonggb
- 30 Sep 2006 14:25
- 20535 of 27111
In your fecking dreams Maestro!
KingKonggb
- 30 Sep 2006 17:35
- 20537 of 27111
Hey Drivel,
Love a nice dog now and then!!
cynic
- 30 Sep 2006 18:03
- 20538 of 27111
my son tried it on his recent trip to Asia and thought it remarkably tasty.
as for maestro, he needs to improve his basic maths skills as seemingly do the guys at SEO, as do the investors with their rose-tinted glasses ..... 1.5p top 100p is not 40 bagger, but rather 66.66 bagger .... however, as this company is 99% certain not to realise that dream, i guess it doesn't matter much
Technotamed
- 30 Sep 2006 19:20
- 20539 of 27111
I have come to the conclusion that SEO will get the funding from one of the two parties at least and that this is one of the most shorted stocks going. This takes into account the amount of negative posters so I see this as one of the most high risk high reward plays going but timing is difficult.
Also it is a very popular stock and therefore when the funding is announced this stock will rocket.
aldwickk
- 30 Sep 2006 20:24
- 20540 of 27111
It will fall to under 1p, and with the amount of new shares that they will have to issue it will take years for the price to recover.
garyble
- 30 Sep 2006 20:40
- 20541 of 27111
ST,
Finally got round to finding the article re: your post 20516. The article was from Proactiveinvestors:
http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/articles/article.asp?SEO:
"
Stanelco plans to build micro-manufacturing plants in conjunction with partners to supply the starch polymer to consumers. The idea is to charge a technology transfer fee (envisaged to be $1.25 million) to the partner. Both the partner and Stanelco will then co-invest to build the plant, with Stanelco retaining a 70% revenue stake it is anticipated that each plant will contribute 4 million profit per annum. The company is currently negotiating with parties for the construction of 5 micro-manufacturing plants. The total cost estimated to build one 20,000 tonne plant is approximately US $7 million. The key fact to remember here is that the starch business on its own, is a wholly viable entity and does not depend on the success of Stanelcos RF technology."
oblomov
- 01 Oct 2006 08:41
- 20542 of 27111
Been away for a while - seems on a quick readthrough of posts nothing has happened except the SP dropping - probably on TB's change to a sell.
Is that about it, or have I missed anything?
tweenie
- 01 Oct 2006 08:43
- 20543 of 27111
Oblomov. Thats about it, SNAFU.
garyble
- 01 Oct 2006 10:00
- 20544 of 27111
Good to see you back Oblo.
oblomov
- 01 Oct 2006 10:45
- 20545 of 27111
Thanks gary - lets hope this thread still has a purpose in the future. Looks a little grim to me, now, I must say, though last time TB dumped SEO the SP shot up like a rocket, so that could be a good omen!
cynic
- 01 Oct 2006 14:47
- 20546 of 27111
unless that funding dilutes the shareholders funds to zero .... and no i am not short either!
garyble
- 01 Oct 2006 16:04
- 20547 of 27111
Which it will do cynic...It will do!
cynic
- 01 Oct 2006 16:13
- 20548 of 27111
garbyle ... i thought you were a fan of this rubbish (sorry; biodegradable) company? ..... if so, clearly you are now rightly disillusioned
ths
- 01 Oct 2006 17:19
- 20549 of 27111
He might have been being facetious cynic
cynic
- 01 Oct 2006 17:40
- 20550 of 27111
perhaps he was drunk instead, in which case perhaps "in vino veritas"
kimoldfield
- 02 Oct 2006 11:06
- 20551 of 27111
Silence is golden.............so is the colour of a Greenseal tray?
kim