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

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.

I suspect that we are beginning to get things into perspective. The market took SEO up to a cap of something like 300m, justified to an extent by analyst projections based on a licensing stream for each GS machine. Now, 200 machines would be income of 7 million, perhaps justifying a quarter of the current share price. It is therefore the commodity products which could give the multipliers. We give SEO management a lot of stick and they did miss the problems with retrofitting but they can't have put more than some 10m into the retrofitting programme which is hardly a disaster. So they talked up the sp but they singularly failed to exploit that by raising the level of funds they needed to properly develop the company - disingenuous rather than dishonest and resulting in loss of directorships rather than being turfed out like Robinson. Now there's a walking disaster for you!

Eric

Why was T. Robinson turfed out?

Eric. Not just loss of directorships. The 2 have gone - totally. An Email I saw referred to their "departure from the company". Turfed out!

Interestingly IB took up his Open Offer Entitlement but Age of Reason (HW) did not appear to have done so (or at least not the bulk of that entitlement) despite reporting share sales with the intention of using the proceeds for the take-up.
Who knows better - IB or HW?

Tony. Thanks, hadn't seen that. Recall an RNS which indicated that Age of reason Foundation had sold some of their holding, realising an odd million. HW obviously believed his own hype and clearly out of his depth. Sad really - only 1 million! One implication, I suggest, is that time will be needed to takeover and evaluate, possibly renegotiate, proposed contracts so patience will be needed.

Eric

Tony,

Interesting that we have had no word from R&A or AoR re their holding, unless the rule does not require an announcement if their holding is reduced by dilution.

Also, AoR's entitlement was for 130,246,873 for which 85,000,000 shares were sold to finance part or all of their take-up. The shorfall in take-up was 139,122,726!

It begs the question - where have they gone - to a competitor - Sphere ??

Gary

My impression is that no notification is necessary on dilution but is on Take-up of the Open Offer.

I reached this conclusion on the basis of an RNS was issued when AoR sold. An RNS when Directors took up their Open Offer Entitlement. And an RNS when one of the already Notified "Institutions" increased its holding purely from it's Open Offer take-up. But nothing further from AoR.

But I do get a lot wrong ;-)

I suspect that both are subject to confidentiality agreements as part of a severance package so the best thing is to just forget about them. I suspect they are OK financially whereas a lot of investors have suffered from their hot air.