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

Well .
I'd heard the rumour and dismissed it- given the spate of rns's referring to s'pol300 fta approval beimng imminant.
lol.
cheers TR, at least someones open and honest.

I'm with TR, 100%.
Not as badly shell shocked on the SP as some so perhaps i have a different agenda, but on the whole I will wait, increasingly impatiently but I will wait, because the rumour mill I hear keeps churning out the same story as some of the more positive posts on here.
Not massively happy, but positive on the future.
Keep up the good work, TR.
Alan

Tony,

I'm sure you've made your post in good faith, but I'm rather confused. If Starpol 3000 has not been submitted for FDA approval
how do you explain the following?

From RNS 2nd May 2006

'As announced on 14 February 2006, Starpol 2000 now has the
relevant US FDA approval, along with its European equivalent. Starpol 3000 is
expected to be confirmed as fully compliant under the same regulation and we
expect approval in turn for this within weeks'

How could they expect it to be confirmed as fully compliant if they hadn't submitted it?

Oblo,

Me thinks you're clutching at straws. As we've sadly become aware, SEO's RNSs have been quite misleading, but technically there is nothing wrong with the wording:

1) Starpol 3000 is expected to be FDA compliant.....we all expect that
2) FDA approval is expected within weeks....pick a number 8, 16, 52, 104.....

I simply hope that the culprits responsible for such misleading news releases did not receive golden handshakes.

gary,

Not clutching at straws, merely pointing out that, as you say, we were misled.

I realise that the RNS could be taken to mean no further FDA approval may be necessary - i.e. 'compliant under the same regulation ' could mean it was already covered, but then 'we expect approval' suggests the opposite, or at best SEO were uncertain as to whether the existing approval also covered Starpol 3000 and were waiting confirmation.

Having put out this RNS you would think they would clear up the confusion they had caused, particularly as that RNS together with nunerous others put out by the company encouraged investors to invest more money at high SP's.

With the ensuing drop in SP and then subsequent support from shareholders of the open offer, any decent company would answer the questions put to them on this matter. The fact they wont comment officially and will only issue undocumented snippets for which they are not accountable to major investors such as Tony, through the back door, tells me we're dealing with a dishonest company who have nothing but contempt - at least for their non-institutional shareholders.

Oblomov and all

Forget the mislead, if TR's comment about 3000 not yet being submitted is true then that 2nd May RNS was a blatant LIE to shareholders.

Thanks for the info Tony. Cheers.

Great to read sensible and constructive posts, I, like many others believed in SEO and have come unstuck - at the moment !!! We seem to have got rid of the pratts for the time being and a lot of sense being written.
Thanks

Dave

Oblo,

I do agree with you, but to harp on about it does no good. Either action is taken or more importantly we overlook their past transgressions in the light of finally achieving those long promised, over-hyped deals etc.

We can all dwell on the past in vain. I'd prefer we look to the future {IF there is one} having learned from then past.

As I understood Tony's post, Starpol 3000 was withdrawn for further work on formulation. Reading between the lines, it was indeed submitted but withdrawn, presumably in the light of feedback from pilot scheme testing. No doubt the prospective client(s) would be involved in the validation process. My view is that SEO management were indeed guilty of marketing naivete and (H White in particular) over optimism, but I don't think they have been intentionally dishonest. Any RNS will only be firm news so we are better off without the half-baked stiff we were getting.

without the half-baked stiff we were getting ??????

Are SEO as bad at crematorium as they are at packaging and PR????

Sorry.
Alan

Agree with garyble. We should use the lessons from the past to inform our concerns for the future. Are management making a plan? Are they achieving it? Whne will it bear fruit? Whne will they tell us?


Since RNS's are no longer handed out like confetti, we need to establish what is the minimum timetable for announcements around 6 monthly accounting, end of period trading updates etc.

Last year we had prelims on 28th Feb, so that at least should be repeated. It would be nice to have it sooner, but I expect they will want to wait as long as possible to include any possible good news.

We also had a pre-close update on 16th december - nothing forthcoming in that regard so far. Are we now in a close period? Or could we still have a pcu this month?

Barring further bad news, I will stay in until prelims and make a decision then.

Did they ever sell any Starpol 2000?

ps Is Mastersons still around? he knows his beans.

SD,

SEO have shifted their year-end from 31st October to 31st December so I expect Final results will not be out untill end of April.

I would like to think that they have a cunning plan of making the announcement of MMF completion nicely coincident with the Finals which by all accounts will be dire, but I do expect a considerable increase in T/O, especially if Biotec production has hit capacity.

After all, the fund-raising was to finance the first two MMFs, and previous indication was supposedly 6 months to completion.

Well done, Gary. End of April is just about on the six month spot. Can expect to hear that two MMFs are in place, revised 3000 is with FDA and, just possibly, they have a contract to supply (and even one Greenseal in operation). That wise old stockdog will then make his decision and that should set the price moving - either up or down!

IMO consolidation of shares before any other news,just cannot see the SP riseing (if it rises ) with so many shares in circ, anyone ealse think this?

I have said this at least 3 times in the recent past!

It is obvious that the company cannot have so many shares in circulation.

I will state it again:

Trading Statement/results
Share consolidation
Contract news - which will lift the price
Stanelco bought


It's the only way forward.

Tony ,

I've only just seen your email - thanks, have replied.

Tony and Stockdog.

Good posts, good reads.