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

Maestro,

As gary says, revenue from MMF's not pure profit - the MMF's are not a license situation and will have the usual running costs associated with any commercial enterprise.

Also, it is all very well having the capacity to produce 20 tons per annum but you make nothing unless you sell the bloody stuff!

The MMF's were a license situation when MW announced 'deals in the final stages of process...', but I believe Sphere put an end to that and we can forget those particular deals and the letters of intent. What we have on the table now is a completely different commercial venture funded by us and, in the main, Schroders, producing something for which at present there are no committed buyers.

Going back to the US office closing - if you had a small US office and were about to embark on the building of two MMF's in the US, would you close the US office if you were confident a lot of business in the US was just a short way down the line?

'Also if Stanelco convert 80 machines for salad bag lines' - I assume you're talking Greenseal. Thats a big 'if' considering that 18 months ago we expected 200+ licenses by now and to date we have none!

I also needed a ten bagger from the price you mention of 1.36p - unfortunately the SP has dropped still further and I probably now need a 14 bagger!

If Schroders influence results in some kind of profit (the jury is still out) I think at most, from the current SP, we're looking at a 3 to 4 bagger. At that stage the institutional investors such as Schroders will cast SS Stanelco afloat and rub their hands together.

Just to be different, again!
I believe the Starpol 10cents per lb Maestro quotes is indeed pure profit. The information coming, as he says, from the Project Foil slides presented to Institutions.

This would be so for Distribution Agreements. Under these, the sub-licencee does the manufacturing, is responsible for sales and SEO have no capital investment.

Under the MMFs SEO have capital investment commitment of $5million but receive "royalty on lb compounded in excess of 10cents per lb" as well as a Technology Transfer Fee of $1.25.

I know these slides appear to negate some previously announced plans or descriptions (JVs fully funded by partner etc) but they are the latest we have - and do seem to have been prepared in the light of other decisions that have come to fruition - but probably not the "1st facilities to be agreed by Oct 06, revenues April 07" nor " "1st products on shelf 1st November" Walmart" .

But also SPhere may have scotched some of it.

Tony,

Who runs the MMF's and finances the running?

Post deleted by the author as it was complete rubbish!!!!

According to these slides for MMFs :-
We invest in equipment $5m
We receive Technology Transfer Fee $1.25m
We receive royalty on lb compounded in excess of 10 cents per lb

SEO will get its in excess of 10cents as a gross royalty for doing/spending nothing more than putting up the "setting-up" contribution of $5m.
From here we know no more, but the MMF will have the expectation of profit Otherwise what is the incentive for it's owner(s) doing it? Whoever the owner(s) be. That profit would be after costs which include Royalties.

So we are back to SEO receiving a Gross Royalty with no costs falling on itself.
And, if it is to be a JV, a share of the net profits too - but there has been little or no mention of JVs lately.

23000 !

But who are the owners? Are the MMF's being built on the assumption that someone will want to buy them? If so, the 10 cents per 1lb royalty figure is purely speculative. The actualt figure would be whatever could be negotiated with any perspective buyers - assuming they find anyone who wants to buy them.

Tony's post no 23000 above prompted be to look back at the early posts. Here's post number 4 - Bosley said ' i think its worth hanging on at least for a little while longer' 'still the possibilty of a deal ' and 'new products and technology at stanelco means only good things. i would like to see more news flow'

lol - almost 3 years and whats changed!!!!



bosley - 20 Feb 2004 17:26 - 4 of 23001
its very tempting and i feel the same way about fortune oil. as far as stanelco is concerned i think its worth hanging on at least for a little while longer . the 90 day trial with reckitt beckinser is close to ending so something good could happen there . and there is still the possibilty of a deal with sainsburys in the background. the negative aspects i.e. legal problem with bioprogress is probably the reason why this share isnt flying as well as last years loss. as far as i can see, the new products and technology at stanelco means only good things. i would like to see more news flow and it pains me to see the spectacular gains bioprogress are making while stanelco move sideways and slightly upwards. but .......any gain is beter than a loss........

was it that long ago? blimey, doesn't time fly ......

How exceedingly perspicacious of you, bosley................

Blimmy us three still here.

not when i'm using right guard, alan ;)

The last dregs of a discredited regime..........the rump of a gentlemans optimism society........

Gentlemans Optimism Society still waiting.

STANELCO investors website...v.good kevin hector
http:// STANELCO investors website...v.good kevin hector
http://http://www.stanelco.devisland.net

Does SEO have a department of misinformation ?

Stanelco PLC Shareholders Discussion Forum


To register and use this discussion forum you must first agree to the following :-

You are a shareholder of Stanelco PLC.

You will not discuss any companies other than Stanelco PLC, it's subsidiaries, partners, clients and prospective entities thereof.

You will not post 'share tips' or any other 'investment' suggestions.

You will not post anything considered to be 'spam' or links to websites for your personal gain.

You will not post anything deemed to be 'ramping' or 'bashing' of Stanelco PLC.

You will not post 'rumours' related to Stanelco PLC, other than those published in the press or by analysts.

You will not submit any personal abuse to this site, directed at anyone known on or off the forum, either posted or by Private Messenger.

You will not post anything that infringes Copyright.

Paul, you forgot to add no freedom of speech. What a control freak.

Mention of SEO here - not very exciting:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/12/16/cmclub16.xml

oblomov,

Am not very impressed at the way they run their portfoilo,a 12,000 portfolio with 10,000 invested in a diamond mining company and holding SEO at 16p and not cutting their losses you have thought they would known better after Marconi.