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

Now Geoff Ho is a more informed guy than me so he may well know that the placing will not go ahead. If he doesn't then he is underestimating the power of refinancing

A Big if coming....

If there is a refinancing I assume the refinancers will have insider info on deals ahead. Therefore they will know their money, at least in the short term, is backed by something concrete. And also as insiders they clear Geoff's "mad" hurdle

If there is a refinacing, it will be done at such a level, deemed to be 0.8p that means the refinancers think they can get a serious return.And by serious return this must take into account the low level of liquidity

Given all this a refi would be positive in outlook and I would see that the refinancers would get expect to see a doubling of their money -- unrealised -- on refinancing just t compensate for liquidity

As such a refi will see the share towards 2p no refi and towards 0.2p . You pays your money you takes your choice

Have a look at other posts GeoffHo has written on this site - I think that shows he is who he says he is.

Goeff's a liar..end of story

Prove it maestro .... or shut up!

The oily one

Had this reply to my email from MoneyAM this morning,

Yes this is Geoff Ho from Shares Magazine.



MoneyAM Support

14m buy at full ask !!

Can you cut n paste the e-mail?

I assume that the 14m trade was a buy given the price of .98p with the spread .95 -.97p!

And, if it was, then somebody definitely knows something that you and I don't!

The oily one

09.04 Well its now listed as a buy on my screen

aldwick a liar too..

Has anyone got any insect repellent?

The oily one

LIARS,LIARS,LIARS!!

Maestro,

I am reluctant to squelch posters, but due to your consistent useless posts I have joined the long list that can spend no more time reading your rantings.

Goodbye

YA BUNCH OF CITY DECEIVERS!

GeoffHo 'I am just genuinely perplexed as to why so many people believe in this company and take offence at the slightest criticism.'

I dont know whether you are GeoffHo of the shares magazine or not (I've never read the magazine) but whoever you are you seem to be unaware of the following and I hope it will help to ease your perplexity:-

There are a core of shareholding posters here who have suffered what to them are considerable losses on this share - I know several of us have lost between 40,000 - 100,00, and I believe there are some who have lost more.

The belief in the company has stemmed from RNS's and (possibly non-shareholding) hacks like you (if you are GeoffHo) who change opinion like the wind with no thought of the consequences to people who believe what you say. Tom Bulford also has a lot to answer for in that respect.

These genuine shareholders with a belief in this company have for over two years had to put up with posters seemingly genuine at first but with a hidden agenda that surfaces after a time to either knock or ramp the share or poke fun at those who have lost money - so far you fit the identikit of one of those posters perfectly.

You breeze in, apparently because a shareholder on this BB has taken offence that you have called shareholders dumb, and make inane comments attacking the SEO management with childish name calling and say you're perplexed at why people have taken offence. Thats shows a staggering lack of sensitivity to the situation

Myself, I'm perplexed at how someone like you can be unaware of how shareholders are feeling now. If your judgement can be so bad in this respect it doesn't say much for your powers to analyse the situation in relation to SEO.

You dont 'hurt my feelings' - I just find your blase attitude incomprehensible, given the above.

On the question of SEO's management , we have no reason yet to believe that the management have lied or misled in their RN's or recent meetings with shareholders. That they are inexperienced and out of their depth is a more likely cause of the current situation.

You have intimated legal wrongdoing - can you substantiate that for me please, or was it just a flippant remark with no thought for the effect it could have?

Good post Oblomov

The oily one

To summarise Oblos post;
It is not the content that people take offence to (andysmith is a highly regarded poster on here who is not a fan of SEO) but to the tone of posters.
No genuine invester would enjoy the sight of a fellow invester losing vast amounts of money, but some posters seem to delight in it. Your post came accross as that.
Alan

I believed Geoff was from Shares Mag , i only emailed to confirm it to other posters. And i agree with everything he said.

I might buy 20m this morning to knock the sp another 10% ?

So you are not going to cut n paste it?

Geoff Ho has only reiterated my own opinion of SEO senior management's incompetence in basic marketing skills which I have posted here before and have been amply bourn out. He went to great length to spell out that it was his opinion not the magazine's, some of you could obviously not be bothered to read all the sentences.

Had SEO been a task in the Apprentice, the whole board would have been fired for
lack of market research and basic business skills, poor communication and bad management.

Above all they needed to go on an old fashioned Marketing course and learn that sales and product are only two of the necessary attributes in the marketing mix. They obviously had both of these buttoned up but completely forgot the rest. Perhaps they thought it all just happened if you got a product and a customer?

If it turns out that any directors hold rights to part of the technology via other companies then we will have another Pheonix/Rover debacle.