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

because i JUST LOVE the abuse from you misguided souls .... my only regret was not following my own advice and shorting at 3p

Do any of you believe that SEO will be pushing the Starpol and negotiations now totally on their own OR do any of you think Schroders (and maybe other funds with a large stake) will be actively involved with SEO in sharing their experience, providing some necessay muscle to negotiations and helping SEO deliver some major contracts?

When Schroders start to sell I will worry but for now for them to have invested and bailed SEO out they either believe Starpol is a definite (and commercially viable) step forward or their research analysts have not done their homework properly.

Dawall,

For what it's worth I feel SEO will push totally on their own, but the potential buyers obviously know Schoder and others are the backing.

IF Biotec has hit full capacity {20,000 tpa}, we were led to believe this would equate to "in excess of 44m revenue", of which 50% wuold be assigned to SEO. The interims stated a 2.6m revenue compared to 1.5m annual T/O, so we should be expecting a 300% improvement to T/O for 2006.

it's PROFIT that is the important number ..... T/O without that is a complete waste of time

cynic ; 'SQUELCHED'

Absolutley right cynic.

Although, as everyone expects {hopefully}, the results will not be good. The cash burn should have reduced significantly from ~ 0.5m per month, needing a T/O of 6m to break-even. IF the good ship SEO now has a competent crew, the next interims {~Sept.} should post a profit.

In any event, there should be sufficient in the annual results to give us an accurate assessment of the state of the business for the near future.

Responses to dawall and bosley. I would not have expected Schroders to take any involvement in oprational matters. I would expect them to receive Board papers and have a represenative present; in other words a lead investment role as their active interest will be a comfort to other institutions. The speed of their commitment after the placing indicates that they were party to the placing in the first place and the placing was a success because they were involved. They will have been key players in the departure of White and Balchin and ensuring the new sales guy had the right credentials. Their first checkpoint could be progress by the prelims but, more realistically, perhaps six months into the 12 months they are likely to have allowed for the company to become established.

Bos has got a point - I have actually only commented when I have taken, lets say, a non-negative view of the company. I just don't think holders want to hear people attacking their investment. I got out at 7.75p and didn't comment again until we were in the placement stage and Schroders became involved. What you don't get, Bos, is that that put us onto a different playing field so that there is little point in carping on about history. OK, Sharesure's comment re the performance of Greenseal is very relevant; at one time our hopes were based on Greenseal but, following technical problems, it has clearly run into performance problems. I have not seen any comment on reasons for the speed problems (anyone?). However, attention is focussed on Starpol and other Biotec products. Just as Greenseal had potential multipliers because of intellectual property licencing so there are multipliers in scale for what is essentially a commodity but again protected (to what extent?) by copyright.

For those looking at Stenalco for the first time, it is wise to understand the background. But it is fair to say that the key 'management rating' criterion has moved from very negative to neutral (or 'awaiting assessment'). The main strength remains technical innovation whilst we can only hope that they are putting their product commercialisation and marketing house in order.

Eric

Eric, when will you buy back in?

zscrooge I have a pot, not that big, which is in cfd's where I see short-term upside (currently in AZM and JR. - Just Retirement). I have my eye on the Prelim date because I don't think any announcement is likely before then. Even then it may just be a confidence building exercise. The fundraising has bought them time and they need to tackle the whole exercise professionally. The answer is not particularly helpful: the most likely timing is when I have developed a margin on the cfd pot. By the way, I have put Champion Investor money in!

Eric

Eric,
SEO have been aware of concerns over the speed issue for some time; I have it on good authority that they "seemed to be surprised that the Greenseal machines would be considered too slow, but now that it has been brought to their attention they would work with the manufacturers to increase the speed" The machines were handling around 60 trays per minute at the time, their prospective client needed a machine that could handle at least twice that number. I do not know what the present situation is, my contact is abroad for a while.
kim

KIm Thanks very much. I think we have hit on a key point. We are talking about a matter of fact so hopefully we will be able to find out just what the trays per minute picture is. Sounds pretty fast - a tray per second - particularly if sequential rather than parallel. Does anyone else have the info? I'll ask Paul Masterson who seems to have the contacts.
Eric

I have SEO in my C.I. COMP.. I see Bosley is a few higher than me.
Last C.I. comp. SEO got me up to 3rd position, bet it won't happen this year.

FWIW I re-purchased the 200k that I sold last week, no reason other than I feel that I should have stuck with my thoughts that Starpol products will be the main winner for SEO whilst income from their other products will eventually provide all funding for R&D. Wait for the RNS tomorrow:- "We regret...................."!

Kim PM doesn't think that the speed is a problem. Your point anyway is that SEO would work with the manufacturers to solve the problem. Maybe the RF could slow down a converted machine whereas you wouldn't expect any problems with a new machine given that the spec would define the throughput required.

Eric,
I really hope that SEO have been able to address the speed problem, when it comes down to making a profit the 'big guys', for all their spouting about going green, will not accept a machine that turns out 60 trays a minute against one that will turn out 200 a minute (Ishida Europe) no matter what method is used; it makes a difference of 8400 sealed trays per hour which you will agree, is not an insignificant number. The 'green' pros were outnumbered by the 'profit' cons at the time. Naivety was one of managements biggest failings in the past, I am hoping that it IS now in the past.
kim

It is inconceivable that SEO would retro-fit GS to a machine without first defining key performance measures, of which pack rate would certainly be one.

EWRobson, I always value your posts as they are sensible and level headed but I am not convinced on your arguments regarding Schroders involvement with SEO. Yes they perhaps see SEO as a nice investment but I don't buy into the idea that having put a few million into the placing they have much say whatsoever in the SEO boardroom. A few million to them is the equivalent to me sticking 100 on a 3 legged donkey.

I'd like to agree with you but on this occasion I don't and will wait and see what comes down the line.

Q.

Kim Some helpful feedback on throughput which comes primarily from the GreenSeal video from Stenalco. The low volume machine shows a dwell time of 1.5 secs per weld, giving 40 cycles per minute; 4 packs per cycle would give 160 packs per minute. The Proseal, Multivac and Mondini large scale machines have 8 packs per cycle putting the (theoretical?) speed at 320 packs per minute. The manufacturer quotes a lower rate without GreenSeal because heat sealing is slower and needs longer for the heat to penetrate and melt the plastic to create the bond. Looks as if you have heard misinformation. I think all this info is in the public domain.

I am not sure whether we have any technical wizzkid on the board at the moment. In addition to Paul Masterson, Andy Smith always knew his stuff. What is coming over is that the Technical guys at Stenalco are doing their stuff - a new patent, too complex for me, published today (Patent No. EP1749641). The feeling is that, if the problems have been technical, they have been or will be overcome.

Re the point from Q (wasn't that a souce fro the new Testament?) I have had direct knowledge of Schroders though in the rather distant past. Their style is to get involved, perhaps by an an associate consultant, to influence the company in which they are investing. Their involvement in leveraged buy-outs will only follow a due diligence process. They are putting pension fund monies in here and I would be most surprised if they were not keeping a close eye on progress. It seems highly likely that the departure of White and Balchin was part of the price of their backing. Given the dreadful performance last year (thoroughly naive about funding needs for instance), for the issue to have been successful, City investors must have gained confidence from somewhere and Schroders is most likely.

What do they say, Q Ed! Are you called Ed?
Q Eric

Eric,
No not misinformation, historic fact however, as I said. SEO readily admitted at the time that they could not match the speed of Ishida and other machines, irrespective of the number of lanes, 2, 3,4 or 8. I repeat that I hope that they have been able to overcome the speed deficiency: they did have tooling issues last year but they said that they had overcome them. I do not know what those problems were.
kim