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

I also believe that each product in the range has to be approved due to varying chemical composition and possibly impacting of safe daily intake.

Oblomov,
Not saying it does not need approval, just asking if when a product that has been approved (Starpol 2000) and an improvement is made (Starpol 3000) is FULL testing required and approval required for the product as a whole or just for the added ingredient. The statement 'under the same regulation' ,could that mean it is only any none adverse effect of any additional substance. Just asking.
There is no record on the FDA site re submission or approval for Starpol 3000, which I find confusing.

Garyble,
Just read your post. It is strange that Starpol 2000 is still not mentioned on the FDA site.
Did you find your info via the SEO site as I did re Starpol 2000.
FCN 558 relates to Starpol on the FDA site (2000) is not mentioned.
I will stay confused.

You're not the only confused, greek.

My last few emails to SEO have gone unanswered or I'd ask if they could clear up the confusion. Does anyone have any more success than me communicating with them?

oblomove
i e/mailed them a couple of times, i didn't get an answer either not even the mandatory one

still in ftse then

On one BB someone posted that Sylvia was on holiday and that a temp was there, lets hope so?

Kicked out of Small Cap to Fledgling index.

http://www.ftse.com/tech_notices/2006/Q4/FTSE_UK_Review.xls

http://www.ftse.com/tech_notices/2006/Q4/FTSE_UK_Review.xls

http://www.ftse.com/tech_notices/2006/Q4/FTSE_UK_Review.xls

Well done Stanelco!!

Demoted, no news, no contracts, no income!!

It's now up or extinction!!

Schroders must have known this was going to happen - Let us hope it is a temporary situation.

As I have said the clock is ticking and time is not on their side.


Where are these elusive/alledged contracts?

may all at seo have a very shitty xmas.

Greek,

FCN 558 and the info I posted is on the FDA site {will post link later}.

You'll probably find that the FCSs are identified by their constituent names and not their brandnames. Also, as Starpols are simply blends of existing approved substances with the odd "top secret" ingredient. it maybe only the additional elements with reference to the pre-existing FCSs that need a mention.

Re Starpol 3000 - FDA

Just checked my notes of the EGM of 6 November.

Oilywag asked about the 16 week period being up in December.

MW said "Starpol 3000 is a coextruded material of 3 layers like a sandwich. Two outer layers are PLA derived from corn starch. The filling is Thermoplastic starch from BioTec. Thermoplastic is considered to be a foodstuff coming typically from potato starch which does not need any approvals. PLA is a materialused by some supermarkets already for food contact. The only formal test we need to do is just to get a confirmation of the combination of the two materials put together would not be safe. There is no reason why two food contact materials put together would not be contact safe. We are waiting for that."

PL added "we are waiting for final approval"

IB "The development of the material is complete, it is being produced by a pilot machine."

Oilyway "Is it being tested in the States at the moment? ... as part of approval process".

MW "Yes, There are tests going on.."

Clear everyone?

As Starpol 3000 Tony!

Garyble,

Re your comment "You'll probably find that the FCSs are identified by their constituent names and not their brandnames". Yes that makes perfect sense.
As to the details on the FDA site, I did see it there, it was the none mention of 2000 or 3000 that threw me.
Your previous statement makes it clear.

Tony,
Your bit also helps. Looks like Starpol 3000 Approval (fingers crossed) is just a formality.

Cheers Greek.

Tony/greek

'PL added "we are waiting for final approval"'

It answers the question 'approval not obtained as at 6th. November', but not the question 'Why not?' and not the question 'How has it thus far taken 210 days when the default FDA approval/non-approval period is 120 days?'

And can we believe information given by members of SEO's brilliant management team verbally when we cant even believe what they put in a RNS announcement!

Oblomov,
I agree it is strange.
All I can surmise is that the date of submission for Starpol 3000, was not 120 days prior to 6th November. SEO as we well know are very good at getting dates, info wrong.
If there was an FTSE top 100 for RNS AFX cock ups SEO would be at the top of the leader board.
I still feel that whatever the result from FDA a news release would be a must as per LSE rules.
If approval has not been granted, due to the product not reaching acceptable standards and SEO kept it quite, I would be contacting the LSE and wanting to know what actions if any they proposed to take.
Whatever the result from the FDA it must be sp sensitive.
I think we will just have to wait and see.
(Out now for most of the day).
Cheers Greek.

Greek, 'If approval has not been granted, due to the product not reaching acceptable standards and SEO kept it quite, I would be contacting the LSE and wanting to know what actions if any they proposed to take.'

Particularly as the 120 days from the AGM statement in May would have been up before the EGM and open offer in November.

OB,

Hear, Hear.