We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stanelco | SEO | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.12 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 18/5/2011 23:58 by wolterix forgotten about this fred - but not a bad thing where SEO is concerned.. |
Posted at 08/7/2010 10:10 by barf2 It's not the issueing, it's the having something to issue that concerns me.As we know SEO have not issued anything for over 3 years now about any decent orders etc. Initially they used to say 'we don't want to repeat the old management style of empty positive statements' and we could all understand that but after 3 years the question is WHY haven't they got anything to shout about? ......and we're not far off what happened to MDX as it is! over 90% loss in value in 3 years - only 10% left. So, if SEO don't want to make those mistakes.......what did happen to the substantive product launch in 2009 Q4? if SEO don't do hot air where is that launch? |
Posted at 01/7/2010 10:05 by sirmark Stanelco (LON:SEO) (SEO 0.12p/ £7.06m)Last week Stanelco issued a trading update to the market and most pleasingly, both the RF Technologies and the Bioplastics divisions are experiencing sales growth ahead of market expectations. The Company expects to see continuing opportunities in the Biome Bioplastics division, with this area really driving growth in the future. The trials with a major American supplier to the food processing market have now been successfully completed and are currently moving to a commercial scale-up phase. It is encouraging to see the Company making progress, and now that it is fully funded post the recent placing (raised £2.8m net) we see further growth coming through more quickly. It is also testament to the management's belief in the business that the Chief Executive, Paul Mines, and the Finance Director, Sue Bygrave, both waived their 2009 bonus payments. We applaud management teams making such sacrifices, and this demonstrates the commitment of both to driving the growth in the business. The share price is still around the level that institutional investors recently bought stock at and we think this presents a fantastic opportunity to buy into this attractive bioplastics business. SirM |
Posted at 22/6/2010 01:49 by runnett It's worth having a look at Singer Capital as nominated adviser and broker for SEO. These are the guys who will be on PM's shoulders during and after the transition onto AIM.Have a look at their disclosures: I couldn't find SCM listed under advisors on SEO's website - why does this not surprise me! SEO's information management is quite laughable, their website really needs professional attention for consistency, accuracy and timely releases for all stakeholders. |
Posted at 21/6/2010 08:28 by 2pearly That'll deflate PM's balloon.He was probably going to compare SEO to PLNT at the AGM.He generally likes to always compare SEO with whoever has struggled through the year and claimSEO is doing better. It used to be SYM until SYM 10 bagged while we collapsed. Then it was PLNT, looks like he'll have to find a new comparison target.Somethings wrong if these competitors can achieve and SEO can't.That won't change just because they spend our money changing the name. |
Posted at 27/5/2010 00:16 by runnett I don't think we can hang responsibility of SEO's lack of clarity solely on PM. I do agreee the management aren't showing confidence in the company by not buying. Is replacing PM good thing at this time, probably not. I new broom will do exactly as PM, sweep clean claiming great times ahead. As they do this, allsorts of bad decisions and shareholder value disappear. They will then stamp their authority and snout in the trough. I've been trying to work out where their capital funding will go and if previous aquisitions have seamlessly intergrated into SEO mission. If they have one lol. Daw - I think you have a good point why PI's are a bit upset, look at SEO's history of delivery - exactly!. Their core RF has been built up over a decade and a half as a reputable manufacturer and deliverer of furnaces. The Bio has a had problems from SEO becoming a bio IP company. Mainly due to lack of experts and knowledgeable management in this area. They have had over eight years in a rising 'green' bio market. I believe there is a mix of trust issues from clients and management indecision causing these jitters. SEO success seems from JV's, is this the best way to go, i suppose any revenue is better than none. SEO staff - I have a lot of empathy with the SEO staff. Some of these workers must be ripping their hair out on some of these decisions and management style. I'd love to hear their voice on why a green IP company cannot (doesn't want to) make a profit. |
Posted at 26/5/2010 01:08 by runnett Does anyne know how SEO is going in the US? It's always intrigued me SEO aims for a country who 'don't green', who's manfacturing industry is on it's knees for a numberof years with low consumer spending. I would of though Japan who have to import raw material and is reliant on oil would of been a more natural target. Also considering SEO have more logical in roads to Japanese business through selling their RF ovens. On the upside though (incidentally), BP's awful oil slick near the US may wake up the US nation and kickstart a green revolution - lets hope so. Maybe it's time to take of my critical view of SEO. Time for some research! Business as Usual Cheers Runnett |
Posted at 25/5/2010 07:47 by runnett Hi Doctor, I completely agrre with your statement, cash is running out. Although, needing more cash to make profit is the jam tomorrow philosophy by SEO for a decade. I understand in the first years, SEO was moving away from RF into bio products. So there was a money pit for research fund raising. Sadly with each management change, so does structure and sometimes direction - again causing exceptional costs on the balance sheet. Now, my arguement is for management having a need for a clear and precise strategy or mission for pursuing profits. If you read the last fund raising prospectus, you'll find leverage, politics and clauses interwoven into the information. We had many great debates on the funding due to twists and turns. The bottom line, SEO secure their funding through institutions, get those guys on board and funding is found. The downside, the institutions can 'pump and dump' after an agreed time period. Reason: Generally, Finance houses are arguably money generators for their clients funds not the interests of SEO as a going concern. Their weight for information is a pressure PI's cannot equal, unless at an agm :) Interestingly, i find the fund amount relatively small. I'm unsure of the reason, perhaps it'll come in waves or PM isn't as brash as his predecessors? |
Posted at 13/5/2010 23:51 by runnett Hi Doctor, If your comment, "SEO is fund raising to survive!" is a true snapshot of SEO's position, then we are in real trouble. With revenue increase and PM being upbeat, i find the comment difficult to believe. On the other hand, using a M&S model of takng on Europe a few years ago as an example, the comment is feasible. The difference: M&S management drew back M&S growth plans in Europe to concentrate on their British interests, rebuilding their brand and profit. If you remember the share price went South then after they began closing none profit parts of trading (i.e. european stores)the profits were again realised after a few years. We cannot compare like for like on products, but we can look at management technique protectng the company. The weakest link with SEO is management quality. I'm not blaming the management, i just think they need to be stronger and make the tough decsions when realising their growth strategy. btw, i'm very pro SEO. The products are insightful, their operating market is ripe for the taking. I just hope management can position the company in the right direction. In a decade the promise of a profitable company had fallen short, this coupled with the changeable management has given us mmore uncertainty and vague direction. Interestingly, the RF side of SEO has long been steady - its in a very specific market and SEO are one the best in this area. Perhaps, they should look hard and long why the RF business model is solid. I wonder why they keep trying to get 'multi-stream' bio products to the market with mixed success, especially when considering they are non -profit and cash strapped. The roulette of risk isn't working, i'd suggest they take a leaf out of M&S' book and choose their most commercial products and hold the IP's in the wings or sell them on. |
Posted at 27/4/2010 20:43 by runnett I really should be more serious about SEO, especially when the prelims are looming. I'm going for: Revenue 14.4M Cash 2.5M Operating loss 1.5M I think RF will be increasing, a moan about court costs for patent protection and all is well and satisfactory! Hmmm not to mention the weakness of the pound. Finally interwoven in the fabric of SEO, will be the usual statement of gaining shareholder value and a need for a placement, therfore more cash burning. The big stick will be unless funds are raised SEO won't be able to meet their existing debts etc. They've done it before and they, the board, will use this tactic again. On a positive note, i hope the interim gives a progress report on all of SEO IP portfolios and remaining product streams. Then there may be small hope of a prosperous future for the board - shareholders, who are they? |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
