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

Oblo, Hi - long time.

Going to SEOs website through the link just above your post and their link to the RNS -

http://production.investis.com/seo/regnews/rnsitem?id=1172243931nRNSW8010R

About half way down, Para 8. A: gives the word headings and the figures beneath. I put them into straight lines for ease of understanding and comparison.

I don't see it as a 1% increase. Just that the 35,000 moved their total holding over the threshold of one whole number percentage band to the next, albeit only just by quite small amounts. I have not checked their sums against the Total Voting Rights RNS of December but might when back from the pub!

This all arises under the EU Transparency Directive - henve the RNS referring to Form TD-1.

Well, after several pints, I have checked the maths.
Total Voting Rights 2,977,646,824

Previously they had 208,277,748 = 6.994709591 % (off the top of my head!)
Presently they have 208,313,748 = 6.995918599 %

So have they really moved from 6% to 7% ?
Maybe they are just proud of their recent investment of about 425 and using a TD-1 to brag about it.

Still, when did their declare their previous holding?

Subject to the exemption for certain third country issuers (DTR 5.11.6R), a person must notify the issuer of the percentage of its voting rights if the percentage of voting rights which he holds as shareholder or through his direct or indirect holding of financial instruments falling within DTR 5.1.3R (or a combination of such holdings):

(1) reaches, exceeds or falls below 3%, 4%, 5%, 6%, 7%, 8%, 9%, 10% and each 1% threshold thereafter up to 100% (or in the case of a non-UK issuer on the basis of thresholds at 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 50% and 75% as a result of an acquisition or disposal of shares or financial instruments falling within DTR 5.3.1R);or

(2) reaches, exceeds or falls below an applicable threshold in (1) as a result of events changing the breakdown of voting rights and on the basis of information disclosed by the issuer in accordance with DTR 5.6.1R;

...................
Certain voting rights to be disregarded
5.1.3 R Voting rights attaching to the following shares are to be disregarded for the
purposes of determining whether a person has a notification obligation in accordance with the thresholds in DTR 5.1.2 R:

..................
shares held by a credit institution or investment firm provided that: (a) the shares are held within the trading book of the credit institution or investment firm;
(b) the voting rights attached to such shares do not exceed 5%;
and
(c) the credit institution, or as the case may be investment firm, ensures that the voting rights attached to shares in the trading book are not exercised or otherwise used to intervene in the
2005 annual results had Barclayshare Nominees Limited as holding 60,892,255 shares 6.46%.

The threshold was reached on 21st Feb, a day when only 2.75m shares were traded.

Could have been the reason for the ~110m volume at the beginning of Feb.

So, (if we allow for a small error in Tony's maths - sorry Tony!) the move wasn't a full percentage point but just enough to take them up tp 7%.

Presumably the extra 425/500 or whatever was spent as it increased their voting power?

Are we missing a fine point? The difference between ownership of the shares and voting rights?
I am useless at understanding anything any government says is for transparancy purposes (bit of a paradox there) but could it be simply that Barclays do not own these shares, they have just aacquired the voting rights by proxy?
Perhaps that would help explain why I cannot recall any RNS ever stating Barclays had any notifiable interest.
Alan

Alan.
The RNS/Form lists both Shares and Voting Rights as being the same figures.
I understand Nominee Holdings are outside of the declaration rules. Anyway, Barclayshare Nominees Ltd only had 77million shares (I believe Bas uses them - must be his!) at the Prospectus date.

In that case I admit to being baffled.
Never before have I seen something so opaque issued under transparancy directives (other than every peice of FSA tosh that passes my desk).

On the strength of this recent increase by BARCLAYS, I'm now confident it will shortly be followed by another,where they can conclusively demonstrate they know the correct placements of there collective arses and elbows.

Cant make the RNS out.
As has been said they did not have a notifiable stake previously which as I understand it is triggered at 3% and yet the increase is stated as 6% to 7%. Cant see how it could be a purchase through nominee either.
Could it be that yet again SEO have initiated another incorrect RNS as they have a habit of doing.
Baffled

The hatchet falls and another head rolls!


Stanelco PLC
26 February 2007

26th February 2007





Stanelco plc ('Stanelco' or the 'Company')



Appointment of Non-Executive Director and Chairman elect



The Company is pleased to announce the appointment of John Standen as a
Non-Executive Director of Stanelco with immediate effect. In addition, John
will take up the position of Non-Executive Chairman of the Company following the
Company's AGM, which will take place on 27 April 2007. He will succeed Philip
Lovegrove who will step down at the AGM.



John is currently Non-Executive Chairman of Z Group plc and Chapelthorpe plc, as
well as being a Non-Executive Director of Lavendon Group plc and Financial
Objects plc. He is also Chairman of Council at the University of Hull.



John was previously Non-Executive Chairman of Reg Vardy plc until its sale in
2006. He spent his career in corporate finance and was Chief Executive of BZW
Corporate Finance before retiring from Barclays Bank PLC in 1998.



John will be a member of both the Audit and Remuneration Committees.



Commenting on the appointment, Stanelco's CEO, Martin Wagner, said:



'John's knowledge of the City and his wide-ranging commercial experience will
enable him to contribute significantly to the future development and direction
of Stanelco.


At the same time the Board would like to thank Philip Lovegrove for his
significant contribution to the Company.'

There are no further details required to be disclosed under paragraph 9.6.13R of
the Listing Rules or Disclosure Rule 3.1.2R.

- Ends -

For further information please contact:

Press: Financial Dynamics
Jonathon Brill/Caroline Stewart Tel: +44 (0) 20 7831 3113






This in

'Morning all

Pleased to see the Phillip Lovegrove is leaving and being replaced. I think that, with his constant "we are on the cusp of full commercialisation" utterances he was a little too closely associated with the departed HW.

The new man, John Standen, seems to be very well connected with the city. I shall be attending the AGM in April to get the measure of Mr Standen.

The oily one

Oilywag

The 21 of April is a Saturday. Are AGM's held on a Saturday?

Hic! oops! Got it wrong fellas. I'm sorry!

bonn1e
Read the RNS again. The AGM is on a Friday.
I'll be there, if in the country.

Probably good news (exec Appointment)....but shareholders should look at Chaplethorpe - but make sure you have a stiff drink within reach, it's not a pretty sight - Makers of umbrella frames and such - hardly a growth company and little likelyhood of bettering themselves...as far as history goes.

SEO is still on the cusp - "..of what?.."
. . . . is that the cusp of wanting yet more money, or have the execs called out a locksmith so they can open the filing cabinet that contains the mystry formula that we are told wil become the packaging industry material of choice....huh...I suspect this is running true to form and SEO is like so many other "techo" outfits -
these execs don't understand the technology,
they don't know what it is good for and worst of all,
they don't know how to Market it.
furthermore they don't know (that) they Don't Know - Oh dear!

These are fundamental business requirement even before negotiations start over delivery, price, quality, and dare I mention it(?) - payment.

I see no evidence that SEO will sell any of their technology....and suspect that a competitor will spot the potential and come up with something alltogether better.....just why are shareholders waiting patiently for this to happen...?

The last AGM was in London, a venue with Aircon that made a lot of noise but had little cool. Execs were almost inaudible and as a regular agm-go-er it was about as close to a shambles as you can get, IMHO.
Exec-Platitudes a-plenty as to delays and how things were "likely to happen soon".....but clearly that was to stave-off a revolt.....things have changed? - No! they haven't, not from where I stand.

The SEO company can be summarised IMHO, in three words:-
Lacklustre, lacklustre, Lacklustre.

Page 2 ??

Would you believe....it Stanelco was the only blue stock I had in my Portfolio days end!
plenty of shorting no doubt.

Ian, I'm not sure where MoneyAM got their price rise from, sorry to disappoint but SEO was red at the end of the day, down .03. There were a few other wrong prices, showing a rise, or level price instead of a fall. It would be nice if it was correct!

Kim, why did you have to spoil the only stock I had within my Portfolio worth smiling about after such a deplorable day! LOL

I hope you have better luck today Ian!

Hi Kim,

Well it cant get any worse than the last few days... can it?