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

Keep on talking guys - the sp has just popped up - maybe you can talk it up some more !!

Alan, at the risk of again attempting to arrive at the truth via a different route to your goodself, might I say we wouldn't need to ask SEO for details if it weren't for the fact that everything they put out is ambiguous and as clear as mud!

My response from SEO was exactly the same as Alans - despite the fact that I pointed out that their last statement specifically mentioned that contracts were under discussion and LOI's were in place. They would not even confirm that the original statement was still true/current !

The news must be so massive that they are scared to even open the door a crack !

A flurry of purchases just in ??

Bhunt,
In the event that the original statement is still true/current there is no requirement to confirm it, so SEO having in the past inundated us with needless news releases, are imho confirming it by not confirming it, if you follow me (by their silence).
If anything had changed, that is surely when they would have to put out a release.
No news is very frustrating, but thats how I read it.

Greekman - I agree with your logic - so why would they not confirm that there had been no change in the publicly stated position when I asked them?

Greek, then why did they confirm the numerous other points by putting them in the Prospectus?

Again just an opinion, but they appear to have put a blanket policy out on answering E-Mails, IE wait for general news releases. My feeling (and that is all it is without anything to back it up) is that as soon as the funding is finalized, and the vote pasted news will follow almost immediately. I am only putting this down to the reasoning of my previous post 21783.
If I am wrong those who will come out gunning for me will be wasting their time as I will probably have shot myself, to save the wife the trouble.
After my last buy of SEO, I heard her on the phone discussing contracts. She kept referring to someone called, Dead eye Mcgurk and 10,000 was mentioned. I looked at the SEO web site but can't find him in the list of directors. Still nice to know she's taking an interest in the possible contracts and looking to buy shares in her own name.

Oblomov,

The prospectus had to contain all the information to enable us poor punters to make the decision re the offer. They could not be selective in such a document and everything that was relevant to the offer had to be stated. That is what made it the most honest piece of info put out by SEO, warts and all.

tee hee

Yeah, gm, I am following the same strategy although I learned a few years ago not to let the wife know about any 'dead certs' dealing

Greek, we're going round in circles - thats where I came in saying everything is in the prospectus but the kitchen sink AND any mention of the LOI's.

I rest my case!

OB,

OK we are basically in agreement (I think).
I must admit there was so much info in the prospectus, I read it at least 3 times and still can't quote anywhere near chapter and verse.

Both my screens are showing last trade at 1443hrs, Now is that strange or what.
I can't believe that over 1 hour has elapsed since a trade. Are the mms holding some deals back for some reason.

nice 3m buys just gone through

3mil trades just gone through

someone still buying @ 1.27.

500k just went up and almost as quickly got taken out - but not yet shown.

Could be a big buyer in the background

.....and there it is 1.5m buy

The question it raises is why a 25200 buy needs to be a worked trade. Is the stock that illiquid??? And if so, what are the consequences of such illiquidity?
Alan