Please post Date, Time, Heading of any news released in any official format by Stanelco than you deem relevant to above proposed report.

Thanks in anticipation.

Greekman.

and what will you give him for the likely result of his diligence? .... nul points is my bet as, though i have not followed this, i would doubt if there is much (anything) of substance to interest the relevant authorities.

greekman
There is a very interesting post on Interactive Investor by pollock4 regarding Howard White and his son
Take a look before submitting anything to the FSA

cynic 'though i have not followed this...'

You're in no position to comment on it then, are you, so why bother?

Hugybear,

Yes, very interesting. I read it before seeing your post. I was not going to mention anything on that site re the complaint, but after reading the post by pollock4 I have now posted re the substance of the complaint on that site.

Cynic,

I agree that the authorities may not feel there is any substance, and as previously said, I have no problems re opposing views, but as Oblomov states, I find it difficult to see how you can judge without following the plot.
Someone has to try. A line has to be drawn, or do we just shut our eyes to what we feel is injustice.

To all posting 0900 hrs today.

As a foot note, anyone see the article in The Telegraph on Saturday. The LSE state that 1 in 3 takeover deals probably involves insider trading. Not referring to SEO or any other company, but it shows how corrupt the market can be. Us poor PI's don't stand a chance.

i can comment because the same applies in many many instances ..... most often the gripes are based on general disgruntlement because certain people have done their dosh instead of taking the prudent course of cutting their loss ..... for sure some management is (arguably) not as open as it should be, but then any sensible management will not respond with anything of substance to some individual's request for info, because that sort of info should be for public dissemination.

for sure everything is also not Portia clean, but then nor is general business - e.g. the so-called BAE corruption nonsense which is (imo) merely driven by certain (US!) political pressure ...... however, the real question is do you have any solid evidence that would stand up even in a civil court? ...... almost certainly not is my bet

Cynic, you can answer your own questiona by reading the posts and as Greek says 'follow the plot'.

I've personally made two complaints to the financial ombudsmen over the past two years and won both after being told almost unanimously by those who knew I was complaining that I hadn't a chance. The evidence is in the RNS's and what happened afterwards, particularly to the cash raised in the open offer on the basis of the US MMP's.

IMO

i have long thought SEO was a load of rubbish and merely regret that i never shorted it ..... my observations were general ...... if you have indeed succeeded in "winning" on a couple of occasions, though i wonder if there was any financial benefit from that, then good luck to you ...... i don't think the markets are any more crooked than say horse or dog racing, and shares are merely another form of gambling ...... if you don't like the set-up or the odds, then don't bet!

Cynic,

When I invest, I look at the odds, be it on the stock market or race course.
It is when the odds become loaded against me (bending/breaking the rules), I become annoyed. I agree that investing is a form of gambling. One of my portfolio's is a high risk portfolio (SEO are in that portfolio). I except that some companies in this portfolio will fail for many reasons, bad management being one of them. Annoying as this might be, I have to accept it. But rules are there to protect, investors, companies and the market as a whole. I am not so naive that I invest on the premise that these rules are always adhered to but I expect certain parameters not to be crossed. Feeling Stanelco have stepped over the line, was the deciding factor, re the complaint.
Please don't take offense, as I do appreciate all sides of the augment, but feel I have covered most in my previous posts. So please read my previous comments on this thread prior to posting as I do not wish to repeat detail.
If you do read the full flow, I am quite happy to discuss anything not covered.

i never take offense even with the not-at-all-lamented-and-now-sent-to-the-gallows-tcdmt, who reckoned my daughter was fair target for obscene abuse!

by the looks of it, i am just more pragmatic than you, so just avoid companies whose management looks to have more than a little to be desired - e.g. RPT ..... to my amazement, i see that stinker has now gone up 4-fold in the last year

If the post on ii contains genuine info then I would have thought it puts the Howard White reign into perspective and our suspicions could be well founded.

cynic - you're last post amazes me! You're presumably just trying to wind us up. What you're saying is that nothing should be done about a suspected crime (and I'm not suggesting we are talking 'crime' in SEO's case) because there are other crimes being committed and that makes it OK in some way.

Why investigate a murder in Manchester because there's been one in Liverpool and the murderers got away with it there!


Lets just do away with the Police and legal system then and let anarchy replace it - thats what you're saying.

You cant be that big a berk - time to stop digging!

oblomov ..... crime? ....... if so, then SFO should be contacted ..... if you and greekman are actually right in this instance, then no doubt appropriate action will be taken ..... however 99/100 is just inept management or communication, and very very occasionally, the management has saild close or too close to the wind ...... if the evidence against Mr Timmis (RPT) did not stack up to justify prosection, and clearly it did not, then the odds are longer than 1 to 1p that there is nothing to hang the management of SEO, galling as that might be for you guys.

Please lets keep the peace. Report now on way to the LSE, so will not post again till reply received, or specific questions asked, that have not been answered before.

cynic,

you seem to have a problem with reading - from my post to which you refer:-

'(and I'm not suggesting we are talking 'crime' in SEO's case)'

not shouting at anyone ..... though oblomov now denies he was talking of crime, it certainly read otherwise .... merely stating what i think is the almost inevitable outcome - i.e. if you are lucky, some soothing noises but nothing else ..... i shall watch with great interest

cynic,

Are you a child?

My post was answering yours in which you said 'i don't think the markets are any more crooked than say horse or dog racing, and shares are merely another form of gambling '

Crooked = crime in my book - its you who bought up crime and my post relates to that point - in general, not related to SEO as I clearly said with '(and I'm not suggesting we are talking 'crime' in SEO's case)'.

can't be arsed to argue semantics with you ...... i shall just wait and watch with interest as to whether the authorities have the remotest interest in taking any action at all on SEO .... my guess is that your real soreness is because you are mug enough to be still a holder

Cynic - I'm not sore and there are no semantics involved. You're just being a prat, thats all, and looking for an argument.

fine by me if that's your view; personally i have no more view of you than the man on the moon ..... i shall scarcely lose sleep

keep holding them SEO .... you are sure to make your fortune!

Please people, this thread is pointless if things become personal.
My reason for creating this thread was to glean information and help re my complaint. My intention is not to take sides in any debate re hold, sell or buy this share. The SEO thread is more relative to that. It matters not to me what people think re this share. The input up to now has been very helpful in this fact, don't lets allow it to drift to the level seen on other threads/sites.
Not taking sides.

quite right .... smacked wrist accepted! .... lol!