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

Thanks OBLO - looking at that article - why are all the other articles posted on the same page dated December 2006. - It was the same article that I was looking at - but did not spot the date at the top of the page - just seems strange to have the whole of the front page dedicated to OLD news - ????

Baz what front page are you referring to?

The oily one

Ignore this post. Silly me!

I think thats just the page you're 'entering' the site at, Baz.

If you go to the home page at http://www.naturalproductsinsider.com/

you'll find the current news. Part of each page, including the archived articles, also contain new items. Confusing!

Eric,

Haven't we already been here with Fidelity? Fidelity have been investors
in SEO for some time - perhaps someone will know how long, maybe 2-3 years?

They would also have done their due diligence and quizzed SEO, I've no doubt. They presumably believed what most of us believed - that SEO and Greenseal in particular had great potential. I believe Fidelity have reduced their holding - I'm not sure of that, again perhaps someone can tell us.

Point is, Institutions are no great guide, they frequently get it wrong - look at unit trust performances and you'll see a high percentage show losses. I know that from painful experience!

I don't quite follow your maths on the SP - but my maths tell me that even with averaging down my prospects of making a profit are unlikely.

Averaging down is no more than psychologically cosmetic. The loss on your earlier investment is still the same loss. Investing more at a lower price must be based on an objective assessment of whether you would buy some now regardless of your previous investment. The only real advantage is that you probably know the company better than most by now and should be able to gauge a fundamental turnaround, or maybe a chartist's support level.

Perhaps what I can accept is the concept of "substituting down". You buy a sexy looking share at 200p which promptly falls to 150p over the next few weeks. You remain convinced of its fundamental mid term prospects and feel a floor has been reached, so you buy in (same amount). You are proved right and the SP rises back to 200p over the next few months. At that point you sell your original holding and are left with a larger number of shares for the same original cost showing a nice profit - real and cosmetic reward. Of course, LIFO rules mean that you actually sell the original number of shares bought out of the second lot bought - but the maths still holds true.

On the other hand, why would you not now want to run both your holdings for further gain? Same rules apply on selling as would appply if you had only invested once and were now showing a healthy gain - is there a better oppportunity elsewhere or are dividends for your holding just around the corner.

The truth for SEO is that the decimated (does that mean reduced BY or TO one tenth of ones strength? - anyway you know what I mean here) value of my holding would without doubt have a more reliable chance of climbing back towards its original cost in many other stocks. I've held for the gamble (no more) that a quick lift back to, say, 5p (a tad over half my average cost price) occurs on the back of the new investment, institutional shareholders and new management (or less old management anyway).

How long should I give them? Nothing has happened yet except more confusion about the management and no follow through to the prospective developments on the basis of which presumably they persuaded the majority of the fresh investment. I know these things take time, but time risk is as important as value risk when it is linked to a company with a creditable record of greatly diminishing value.

Or am I "tucking away and forgetting" them for 5 years at the end of which time they may be worth nothing or 10 X - a 58% pa compound return from where I am now, not at all bad (althoough only a 2.7% pa compound return from where I started)? To make 10 X after even 10 years is still a 25.89% pa compound return - pretty much my overall target for my portfolio.

Excuse the digression - haven't been out for much of a ramble lately.

sd

.0075p not to long to go now..

That maybe so D@$khead but I really cannot stomach that sort of puerile nonsense.........SQUELCHED!

I second that - what a pratt.

lots of xmas cheer going round...................
I myrelf am looking forward to nailing an SEO exec by thier curlies from any available fireplace.
:-))))

I fear I'm falling into the same old trap of holding on the slide for far too long. I'd consider averaging down by selling a percentage now and re-buying at a lower price. All depends on whether we get any news pre-Christmas.

With the year-end now being 31st December I don't invisage any update until the New Year, so except for a signed deal cropping up, we're going to slide even further.

Just need another day or so to really convince myself. Plus can't sell today as Tuesday tends to be news day.

Im sorry to say this company constantly lets it's investors down, it has huge potential but until the board is replaced then this is going to .8p... I would consider investing then but would not touch until that point...

share consolidation imminent i reckon..don't buy until then

SD

Legitimate argument. Buying or selling on a day should be based on the evaluation of the company on the day of buying and selling. The evaluation should be based on the known fundamentals and the guessed potential.


It is irrelevant the price of what you bought at, or previously sold at.

Averaging down because you simply bought at a higher price is a fools game .

Averaging up when a share price has moved up can be sensible, especially if on margin and using the increase position to finance the action. The appraisal of the share has to be still proving positive with valuation in access of the present or previous figures. But then probably you are balancing the gain against and loss risks.

The wish to prove ones self right by not accepting that your judgement at the time of purchasing a share was wrong and buying in order to bolster ones confidence without cold re-evaluation is one of the quickest ways of pouring good money after bad.

Very few of us have not done the latter and it is difficult not to.

I am more successful investing for my daughter than myself because I am more disciplined and follow the rules.

Perhaps, I am frightened of my daughter and reduce my risk taking.

I hold SEO and think it unlikely that we will see a dramatic price change for some months. (It should be up.)

Good idea. After consolidation, the overall value of the company will probably fall.

oblo Big difference between Fidelity and Schroder. Fidelity are an investment house and I would not expect them to get involved with the companies they invest in. Schroders are what used to be called a Merchant Bank who do take an active involvement in companies, financing recovery, MBOs etc. I will repeat my deduction and would appreciate a debate on the topic: Schroders will have spent some time on the case during due diligence and will have brought in other players other than themselves; they are therefore likely to have been consulted in the first place on financing strategy by Warner (also prob. Wagner); they are likely to have been the driving force in eliminating the departed directors; the current game plan will at least be approved by them and possibly driven by them. That gives me a great deal of confidence that I could not have in current management. It also means that the game from now on will be more cautious but probably much more attractive to prospective clients.

It would also seem likely that we will have a share consolidation in the not too distant future. This would not necessarily mean a move in cap. value up or down but should give more stability to share trading in that movements are likely to be less sharp and the spread lower (relatively).

Eric

All this suming up an still no news of sales.....

Thanks for that, Eric, I take your point on the difference between Schroder and Fidelity.

You're obviously very upbeat about SEO at present - I've lowered my expectations enourmously in order to avoid further disappointment and until (or I should say if) there is some serious 'earned' cash in the coffers I expect to remain more than a little pessimistic and cynical, I'm afraid.

Afer all the chat - show us the money!

I wish Martin Wagner (have I got the right one?) well as CEO, but from where he came I'd have him more as a COO. For a CEO what we need is a strategic thinker to prioritise commercialisation of the different IP strands and who can also sell the IP into a cash-yielding commercial market - preferably someone who's done it before, used to keeping a bunch of institutional shareholders happy (OK and the occasional PI too!). I am sure MW will be fine at producing the products that the CEO has determined to produce and has sold.

Eric, I may believe that Schroders poay close attention to the company's actions, but would not see them as driving strategy beyond bringing about who the chief strategist is. Perhaps MW has truly impressed them. If, as seems likely, he was instrumental in removing IB and HW from the board, then at least he has shown a little steel in his approach. But can he sell the products.

My experience of share consolidations is that the sp usually drops further in the immediate aftermath. But SEO's mgt. might just do it anyway as I have little confidence in them doing what is best for us. Don't like being so negative in a company that I hold shares in but their sloth and incompetence to date is pretty concistent.

From Carclo results:

"We continue to invest in new process technologies which help us to add value to
our customers' products. Two developments, which we have reported on in the
past, are planned to enter production in the coming six months. The soluble
capsule application, developed jointly with Stanelco plc, is being commercially
developed with Agrimin Limited to deliver drugs in veterinary applications. We
are discussing other innovative applications of this technology with a range of
customers. Our ink jet optical hard coating technology will also enter
production in a high volume automotive application. These successful
developments add to our confidence in the future growth prospects of the group