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

Oblo, you beat me to it, just!

Well, thats cleared that one up!

Words such as clear, mud , piss-up and brewery spring to mind.

I think what it means is...........Sphere are just as bad as SEO with RNS'S!
kim

where the MMFs that were to be JVs not licensing agreement then? what have I missed?

Confusion reigns.

The Sphere statement said 'Stanelco PLC is no longer planning to license ....'
which implies that they were but have changed tack. If that isso, why doesn't the RNS make it clear?

Was licensing the IP part of the JV deal? If so, were the letters of intent based on the licensingof the IP? If so are fresh negotiations taking place which now exclude the licensing? If so are they likely to succeed?

Theres a bloody good book/movie in the SEO story of the past few years somewhere, forget Enron!!! It gets better.

LONDON (AFX) - Stanelco PLC said it has several options open to it for setting up joint ventures for the compounding of biodegradable resin in the US.

The company was responding to a press release by Sphere SA, its joint venture partner in the German biodegradable compound maker Biotec GmbH.

Commenting on Stanelco's plans to compound Starpol resin in the US, Sphere said it had received confirmation that Stanelco would not license Biotec's intellectual property to its proposed US joint ventures.

Stanelco said it believes SPhere made the announcement to allay concerns that Stanelco would be transferring Biotec's intellectual property to third parties in the US.

Stanelco reiterated that intends both to optimise the Biotec facility in Germany and to proceed with the exploitation of Biotec's technology in the US.

It pointed out that its previous announcement relating to US resin ventures do not refer to licensing in the US.

'... Stanelco has several mechanisms open to it for forming joint ventures in the US,' the group said.

It added that it has certain rights, agreed with SPhere, that allow it to compound Biotec materials anywhere in the world, including the establishment of manufacturing facilities in the US.

newsdesk@afxnews.com

ak

Put in a slightly different way. No clearer though, who is trying to pull one over the other?!
kim

Sounds like this has the makings of another Court case......

TR if it wasn't so serious I'd laugh

Tony, you do seem very relaxed about SEO; following our visit it seems to have been nothing but muddle from the mgt. Do you know anything more to make you retain confidence that the mgt. do know anything about what they are doing?
What also puzzles me is, if their products are so good, how come a rival hasn't decided to pick up the company on the cheap?

The way it looks to me is that Sphere want part of the action when SEO sign on the dotted line; well its only fair in love and war.

Sharesure.
I know nothing more than we did a few weeks ago. In fact I have been away and largely 'out of it' (the discussions, not the share) for the last 3 weeks so have not been wound up by all that hasn't happened in the period, or the many who see nothing but gloom 'n doom.

I am getting frustrated at the lack of clarity in recent announcements, as much as previous ones - quite different from my impression when we last met.

Hi all

Just got in from my day's chores.

This is from Sylvia Leavey re the Price Monitoring Extension:

"Regarding the Price Monitoring Extension, the announcements are an automatic part of the London Stock Exchanges trading system. After the market closes at 4.30pm there is a five-minute auction to close off outstanding orders. If the auction process would result in a price that is more than a pre-determined percentage above or below a base price (the base price having been calculated by reference to prices during the last ten minutes of trading), the auction process is extended for five minutes, and a price monitoring extension announcement is issued, allowing the market participants to adjust their positions. A second extension can be made if the situation is not resolved after the first five minutes.

For further information view Guide to Trading Services on the LSEs website. Price monitoring takes place for about for 2-3 stocks per day.

I await advice on the AFX announcement.

Best regards

Sylvia

I understand what happened a little more now, but it does worry me that this was triggered by somebody trying to settle the price of the shares too much higher or below the average of the last 10 minutes trading, especially that it happens to only a couple or so stocks everyday.

The oily one

I am e-mailing the company again to get further clarification as to what precisely the RNS and AFX releases today means to us PIs and whether it enhances its negotiations with the companies from whom they have exchanged LOIs, or whether it makes more difficult and therefore delays the day when we achieve a positive cash flow.

I cannot honestly say I understand it and nor, it seems, do most of you on this board.

The oily one

Slightly O/T

Is anyone here a member of Paulmastersons site?

I'd be interested in his take on things of late but find I can't access his forum, seems a tad strange that he goes into hiding now after all the years suckering folks to buy here.

Does he still believe in 35 per share etc or has he thrown in the towel?

Can really see legal action coming his way soon but am still interested in his thoughts.

shamona
Some posters claim that a poster under the name of sirjc is Paul Mastersons over on ADVFN especially with all his cut and pasting

PM1's site was almost as confused today as we are here, but reading through this is generally thought by various posters to be SEO being positive and sorting out of things behind the scenes prior to signing contracts (or announcing contracts).

RMHyams's post below follows the general theme :-

"Having read all the statements regarding the commercialisation of Starpol 3000 I am beginning to understand the situation a little bit better.

Originally, in April 2006 Stanelco stated that they wanted to licence the Starpol 3000 IP. SPhere read that statement, and said to Stanelco that they interpreted the statement to mean selling the IP to 3rd parties, to which they would not agree because control over that IP would be lost. If you then read Martin Wagner's subsequent trading statements carefully you will see that he does not talk about licences but contracts. I believe that these contracts were (and hopefully still are) about to be signed, and that SPhere not being party to these contracts directly have come out with their statement as a tactic to try and ensure that Stanelco do not "sell" the Starpol 3000 IP otherwise SPhere would be left with no other option than to go for litigation. As a result of all this I can see why it is taking such a long time to finalise contracts, which in turn has given shorters in the market the opportunity to create havoc with the SP. "

The reason why no organisation wants to buy SEO at the moment is that any potential acquirer knows that they are better off waiting for it to go bust (which won't be long by the look of things) and then buy the IPR from the administrator.

Tony, thanks for your posts and for copying RMHyams comment on the IPR confusion. I am not at all clear how this one is going to turn out; great pity since it seems to have some good products. Makes one realise that companies stating they want to go green are merely paying lip service otherwise SEO would not be in the state that they are in. Asda in particular has a lot to answer for in all of this as well as SEO's arcane mgt.

Possible reading of the Sphere/SEO argument is that Sphere are insisting that Biotec licence the IP to JV's, since it is Biotec that own the IP not SEO. So SPhere share in the JV licences through their 50% ownership of Biotec. SEO have to share the jv licence fees with Sphere, but get to keep all of their half of the JV manufacturing profits.

Mud, mud, glorious mud . . .