Stanelco Share Discussion Threads

[ch1ck] 28/5/2010 08:48

What we need here is a change of government. Can we vote Mines and the financial director out at the AGM?

[2pearly] 28/5/2010 08:10

Also, having gone through the presentation and prospectus, the risk v reward is suggesting going bust is the risk and the reward is 10% share price growth pa for the directors to qualify for the PEP incentive scheme.

Having said that they've set their sights depressingly low on the last incentive target and came nowhere near - they actually crashed the share price to record lows.

Just another example of the ineffectiveness of these chancers.

[2pearly] 28/5/2010 08:01

What they haven't put in the prospectus or in the presentation under possible outcomes is a change of management.Everything works on the basis of if they can't have what they want then the ship goes down.

A change of captain is a very viable option.One that is commercially aware and enthusiastic about the company and its' products.

Not sure about the 30% reduction in remuneration either - that could just mean they don't award themselves the shaemful bonuses they gave themselves last year but keep the high salaries.

[runnett] 28/5/2010 07:27

Hey Boldtrader,

I'm with you, i agree with your comments. Yep, SEO had big boots syndrome and as you know when trying to run with boots too big - they fall off pretty quickly. Or you fill 'em full of cash and run faster!

The silence of the Finance director is deafening. I'm tired of PM trying to push and and pull the mirrors while others create the smoke. It's time the FD stood up and gave us an appraisal of the current situation. Does she exist? She must of put together the funding package and needs to be open for scrutiny!

Good to see you on here BT, regards

Runnett

[buck581] 28/5/2010 07:26

I wouldn't lend them a fiver

[boldtrader] 28/5/2010 07:02

PS. My belief is we just have to stay with it to the end now,been in too long,may as well lose the lot as the pittance that it would return today!! Cheers.

[boldtrader] 28/5/2010 07:00

Hi Runnett, somewhere in the prospectus they mention pulling out altogether if the vote doesent go the right way,that would be bad news for us !! Just happened with TIME, the products were great the tech groundbreaking (as here) but the cash ran out and the directors etc hold the IP and the PI's end up with zilch. tends to stink but we're all big boys in the Zoo. Regards.

[runnett] 28/5/2010 00:12

Owl you make good points,

I'd also say getting out of the engineering (electronics) sector was more of a priority with a name change. This should of happend years ago, with a big message of their commitment to Bio-products. Is this too little too late?

I'm laughing at PM politics, if we are going to throw out bad news sugar coat it, then slip something really horrible in while everyone is distracted. I wonder what it was, AIM?

[runnett] 28/5/2010 00:08

Hmmmm PM says 'greater flexibility' in AIM. I'd like him to expand in which areas of AIM is his decision making fallen.

[runnett] 28/5/2010 00:03

Stanelco chief executive Paul Mines told Packaging News: "The US market is beginning to really move for us."


Which direction PM?

[runnett] 28/5/2010 00:01

Moving to AIM is a backwards step in my opinion for future funding. I also agree with Wolt, AIM has more wriggle room for companies due to less regulation. Bad for investors good for any management team wishing a manoeuvre round rules. Unless there hand is forced by the Fledgling criteria. If true about AIM, I'd say they have to be clear about their intentions and why.

From AIM it's then so easy to pack up shop and move into private, thus kicking shareholders into touch. With a quick sorry and bye. I don't blame anyone for selling.

I'd consider buying if there was a clear trend and accurate information! I'm on hold at the mo, until management 'fess up - rememeber 'never catch a falling knife'.

[the_owl] 27/5/2010 21:02

My view
1. Name change - Good. At last. BUT Why has it taken him so long, and why has he not explained the name ?

2. Move to AIM will change nothing - small cost reduction perhaps, but seems more an admission of failure in my view

3. The Business model as it is now - does it stack up? I can't see it. The dilution from this placing is terrible regardless of the take-up (probably existing investors)

4. Poor communication, and bad treatment of shareholders in my view

Enough time has passed, and seems to me a very slow road still. Every time more revenue comes along it gets gobbled up by cost at a greater rate. Yes, it could come good, but how long do they need? Total gamble and going to AIM even more so IMHO.

Sorry, but just because it looks low does not mean it won't go lower. I saw RAF shares on AIM trade down to 1/10th of this price! Made some profits but overall losses.

Yuk !!!

[sirmark] 27/5/2010 17:57

30mln late trade at 0.00133

[sirmark] 27/5/2010 17:47

Shud LOL


,.................................

RNS Number : 6782M
Stanelco PLC
27 May 2010

?
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION OR RELEASE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, IN OR INTO THE UNITED
STATES, AUSTRALIA, CANADA, JAPAN, THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA OR ANY OTHER
JURISDICTION WHERE SUCH DISTRIBUTION OR RELEASE WOULD BE UNLAWFUL

Stanelco plc
27 May 2010

Publication of Prospectus


Further to the announcement today in relation to a share issue to raise gross
proceeds of up to GBP 3.5 million (approximately GBP 2.8 million net of
expenses) through the issue of up to 2,806,525,416 New Ordinary Shares by way of
a Firm Placing and Placing and Open Offer at a price of 0.125 pence per New
Ordinary Share, Stanelco plc (the "Company") announces that a prospectus
relating to the Firm Placing and Placing and Open Offer (the "Prospectus") was
approved by the UK Listing Authority (the "UKLA") earlier today.

The Prospectus is expected to be posted to shareholders today and copies of the
Prospectus, which includes a notice convening a general meeting of Stanelco plc
to be held at the offices of Osborne Clarke, One London Wall, London EC2Y 5EB at
10.00 a.m. on 14 June 2010, will shortly be available for inspection at the
UKLA's Document Viewing Facility, which is situated at Financial Services
Authority, 25 North Colonnade, Canary Wharf, London E14 5HS.

In addition, the Prospectus will shortly be available to view on the Company's
website (www.stanelcoplc.com/).

[shudstave] 27/5/2010 16:44

Looking at that Biome picture I have now realised why they aren't getting anywhere.

They're trying to sign contracts with a stick of celery.

[the_doctor] 27/5/2010 16:43

'Striker66 - 27 May'10 - 15:44 - 21648 of 21651
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED'

Is that not a better thing to post BEFORE It goes and raises a load of money?
I'm not a holder here, but what a pr!ck

[2pearly] 27/5/2010 16:05

Just another thought

2012 for profitability? On what is that based? there are no forecasts from the company and edison gave a range of outcomes so is that a forecast?

Just one of the many issues I want addressed at the EGM which will be quite a bun fight.

[2pearly] 27/5/2010 16:01

'while moving to AIM, with Singer Capital as nominated adviser, should save costs and allow 'greater flexibility'. for what? to avoid being upright and honest and allow him to make decisions/sell parts of the company without getting shareholder approval?

It doesn't save costs and he knows it.

So 2012 for profitability is it now? keeps getting further and further away. I thought he was saying SEO would have been in profit last year were it not for the extraordinary costs.

I think he forgets some of the fibs he's told in the past.Does he not realise people keep these sort of things and they will come back to bite him?

[sirmark] 27/5/2010 15:52

Stanelco launches £3.5m funding
Article Date: May 27 2010

As foreshadowed here, bioplastics concern Stanelco, which is renaming itself Biome Technology, is seeking the money to help reach profitability in 2012.

Chief executive officer Paul Mines says Stanelco, which lost a reduced £2.6 million last year, also plans to move from the London Stock Exchange's Full List to AIM. He argues the proposed new name better reflects the former radio frequency technology company's new core business, while moving to AIM, with Singer Capital as nominated adviser, should save costs and allow 'greater flexibility'.

Mines contends a placing price of no more than a discounted 0.125p was needed 'to make sure we got more than our minimum £2.7 million target'. Stanelco/Biome is now focused on starch-based granules, used by large commercial and industrial concerns to make biodegradable and renewable materials for premium-priced 'niche' flexible films, solid articles and coatings.

The shares, which traded above 4p 10 years ago, now languish at a mere 0.14p, down 0.044p this morning and valuing the company at £4.3 million. They have speculative recovery appeal for the bold.

[striker66] 27/5/2010 15:44

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED

[jarvis4] 27/5/2010 15:40

sirm

I cannot see that a move to AIM will in any way encourage the board to treat the owners of the business with greater respect. After all, they've awarded themselves large bonuses for massacring shareholder value. I hope the roof falls in on them at the EGM.