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

Just popped in for a few minutes. Had a skim of what PM says on lse.co.uk and its all a load of serious serial ramping as usual.

He says that he sticks to facts, but the figure he uses for Greenseal are not consistent with what is in the fundraising Prospectus. There is no second year income - if my interpretation of the facts are correct - from new OEM machines. This makes a very big dent is his figures.

It is interesting to see that he made a fundamental mistake of not converting US$ to s when calculating the income from Starpol and then had to re-calculate the figures.

What a to$$er!

Off now to do important things

The oily one

Quick correction It was in the Powerpoint presentation made to institutions prior to the fundraising that says only retrofit machines will generate 20k in the second year only. No subsequent income in year three and thereafter.

rns tomoro 7am...good sauce

brown or tomatoe???????

Vegimite more likely. ;-))

An unusually large spread this morning - I wonder if there is any significance in that?

just the promise of more jam tomorrow........

Looks like another belter of a post from maestro yesterday !

You have to admire his sauce, if not his source.

i don't know if anyone on here had or have tadpole shares?, but its looks to me as if SEO are going down the same road(hope not) but no orders, telling PIs nothing,just spending money untill it runs out and then asking for more. I haven't been that wicked in my life to deserve this , so there must be some very wicked people holding SEO 8))

Auto - There not holding but shorting SEO, what can I say..... Remember blinger, must be laughing and rolling in it by now!!

ROTFLHFAO..

Kim. That's not my experience with Schroders. Earlier comment expected that they would now have a key role in directing company and that has been their way; probably with a seat on the board, possibly via a trusted associate. I can't see them taking pension funds under their management into the situation unless they were serious about it. If they had reduced their holding it would have needed an RNS. People are getting twitchy again. I believe we are now into a new dispensation where the institutions, having bought into the product scenario, are holding the cards and the reins. Thats why I don't expect any premature RNSs, perhaps the reverse. So, for those staying in, the mindset needs to change. Having lost faith a few months ago, that is why I have come back in.

Oily: can you enlarge on the post re Greenseal. One of the attractions was the license flow, not just in year 2 but on-going. Why should an OEM machine not be marketed on that strategy?

Eric

Eric

Presentation slide No 13 stated :-
Retrofit - 35k licence fee first year, 20k second year
OEM - 35k per machine

I cannot remember if Oily, or anyone else, took up the point at the EGM but I will check back on my notes later tonight.

I was told earlier this year by someone who really knows ;-) that these machines have a working life of about 5 years. This means a 20%pa renewal cycle if uptake is even year on year.

Not to sound negative-- but only if they sell any.
:-)))

Eric - Part 2

In the EGM proper, Oily asked for confirmation the revenue for OEMs would be 35k + a one off 25k (despite the slide saying this was for retrofits). MW replied he "could not answer that because of confidentiality. We will strike that deal with OEMs...[can't decipher my notes] ...within 3 to 4 months of working consistently. Thats when they will have the confidence to start..[more]."

Oily may have asked further in the coffee session afterwards (we separated to cover as much as possible) but I did not ask or eavesdrop anything on this point.

Thanks, Tony. Thinking about it, if the OEM is selling for a once-off price it would be difficult to charge a licence fee for one part of the equipment. The mention of a licence fee for year 2 would not imply no licence fee for year 3. However, if it is cheaper to buy a new machine then someone is hardly likely to pay on the annual basis. So 2 years might be a compromise.

Eric
When asked if retrofits were still to be $35k first year + 25k for each of five years MW replied this was generally the same but varied on the individual machine. More encouragement to buy new OEM - is that beneficial?
It's getting as muddy as a SEO RNS !!
Oops, sorry Mr Chairman, an old style RNS.

Tony,

Buying new would be much more beneficial: There'd be increased reliability and therefore better for SEO's image. Old to new does and has posed some significant hurdles to overcome with the consequent drain on resource and finances.

A shift to new machines would be a significant step to establishing GS as the new standard!

In any event, with the long drawn out GS "trials" having reached two years with ASDA, the existing crop of machinies must be nearing life expired {IF life expectancy is only 5 years!}

.0080p next target to reach for bottom

100th of the issue price.....could happen any time now!

Gary

Agreed, new is beneficial from an operational point of view - but is it beneficial to our revenue? It generates 35k per machine and the OEMfg-er does all the work wheras retro income is 55 and SEO does the work. (Figures as Presentation slides which were presumably bullish). Must be a close thing.

MW did say at EGM the main cause of unforseen Greenseal trial problems was the modifications that users had already made to get the machines to suit their individual purposes - before SEO came along to retrofit.

Like the bit about trial machines needing renewal by now!
Fortunately pack houses do not renew all machines at once but evenly across time.

Tony,

Also agree. Replacement machines would be phased and hence a source of steady revenue.

As we've all been made aware, its Starpol that is the money spinner, GS compliments Starpol.