sink/swim, profit/loss, bigger picture up to u

One post talked about positive posters potentially being employed by, inferring paid representation, be damned, totally refuted and if I was, and I say again within my limited financial means, yes, I stand to loose substantial cash, should STI go pear shaped. So yes, I support it but mainly because there are some very good reasons to believe in the ?Team? and the ?Products/Potential Future Products?, if shareholders don?t bury the company because of their perceptions of the CEO ? I also note that I don?t see them attacking the ?Team? and the ?Products?, normally appears these factors have given at least some hope to people in the past. And per my last recent post, why else would I possibly purchase further shares at $0.05 cents on 6/4/2010, madness I think not, and do not necessarily advokate you do the same, but you must decide for yourself :

Whilst I would love to have the time to go back and get all the relevant information together and get it right to avoid all inaccuracies, simply put I don?t, so I apologise upfront now for any inaccuracies, but the intent is simply to ask you, (if in fact you are genuine), to consider the big picture in making any investment choice, if any in this stock. As always I could be wrong, do your own research, make your own decision :

Some current (investment) questions are :

1. Have you invested in STI and if you currently got out would you sustain a significant loss ?.

And are you a day/short term trader who wants to trash and rise this stock any further than you already have for significant, but NOT truly large and substantial gains due to the ongoing negative attack continuing against one man in the company, namely the CEO,
And therefore could you subsequently make even more money by supporting the stock at this level or at least by shutting up and allowing it to run it?s course given some funding and imminent future direction, and thereby make truly larger profits in time ?

2. Have you invested in this stock, based on the potential of the ?Team? and the ?Product?, not just the CEO, as I have, and still have some hope or vision of making substantial gains as a shareholder, or potentially quite larger gains by remaining a shareholder for possibly the next six months, even up to the next year or two, if progress is made and/or further products unfold and get approved and developed ?

3. Have you invested in this stock at a much higher price, currently suffering a potential huge loss if the company basically went belly up, and/or do you want the opportunity to see if this company, ?The Team? and it?s ?Products? can in fact eventually make it and/or eventually make you some money, instead of a loss ?

Perhaps you need to seriously consider supporting the ?Company?, ?Team and Products/Potential Products? regardless of any opinion of the CEO ?

BUT

If you are a day/short term trader who doesn?t give a rat?s whether the company survives as long as you make some money along the way by trash and rise, trash and rise, I can only urge you to look deeper at the team, the current products, as well as the potential for the as yet unknown future (25) twenty five products and urge you reconsider.

Then The Next Question : WHY NOW : When STI finally have some funds to commence manufacture in their Canadian plant with possible further contract potential, have stock of 3m & Futuro, have sales staff trained re same and other indicators of potential progress that may also subsequently raise cash to support future products, including subsequently some of the potentially big cash earners, do people want to continue to trash an entire company, nay really several companies many being led or assisted by highly qualified people in that industry, apparently based on the potential mistakes and potential dislike of one man, be he the CEO ?

There are potentially several companies in one in STI, Stirling Pharma, Stirling Health, Botanical products with further research and development in other areas including animal products, along with chemist supplies of baby washes, ant-aging facial creams, sports injury support and bandages etc., and far more to come ?

I absolutely do not have any reason to want to support the current CEO of Stirling Products, and in fact have written to him with complaints of my own. I can also agree that statements were published by the CEO that did not eventuate, and I certainly agree that explanations for change in direction or not achieving an apparent objective have been minimal and other?s not really at all clear. Some have suggested even a deliberate lie and whilst possible, I still suggest possibly not for the following reasons :

Reason/rider : I have no wish or right to defame anyone on this form and I would remind other?s they also do not have that right, whilst they do retain the right to complain about specific issues, and to attend shareholder meetings and seek explanations for their grievances.

Regardless : One thing I cannot take away from the CEO of STI, is he simply has to be a very smart man to have evolved the current company, in so many different directions, and gained the employment of and the apparent support of the current ?Team? in still pursuing ?most? of the product development, basically without any cash ???. I?d like to see any of us do this, and fully acknowledge that I could not ? Wizard, liar or just entrepreneur with big dreams maybe, whilst I don?t factually know, if you read up on the subject, I do know other current CEO?s of surprisingly successful large companies, and some of today?s alleged best investors are apparently what they are, at least partially, because they expounded and attempted to follow, BUT in their case succeeded in following their dreams, even after numerous set backs, and some both private and public complaint or vilification. Could the CEO of STI, be the same or similar, pre-empt, preannounce a direction believing he would achieve and others would follow, but didn?t. Like it or not we do revere those that did it and achieved and we do critisize and bury those that don?t achieve when they stick their neck out in this fashion. And again I intend no defense, just offer some potential logical explanation and neither do I intend to offend anyone.

Then look at the outstanding ?Team? this CEO managed to employ, and has managed to this point to retain and excellent managem,ent team with highly regarded credentials and industry esperience. Google them, check out their credentials and history especially in the Pharma game and then tell me a CEO who is not highly credentialed himself in the Pharma Industry and.or even financing for same is not ?smart? in employing these people ?

I also note there have been factors outside of anyone?s control, eg. changes to the required regulated acceptance and authorization of e.g. Bio-medical/natural products, e.g. in the USA for instance that stood in the way of immediate product release and on line sales product development and it was even posted on the hot copper site that similar could take years to achieve the same in Australia.

I simply point out changing circumstances cause change of direction, inability of gaining quick regulatory approval for anything, in any country is a major set back to achieving stated goals. If you then add the possibility of a lack of knowledge of the degree of intensity of requirements, and even the normal time lag in gaining approvals to market products in the Pharma industry and you have the potential for major unintended set backs. Add limited cash to develop in an industry noted for quick cash burn and long lead in times to development and approval, and thank god it?s not my problem.

And there are those that point to previous losses and previous inadequacies involving this CEO, and you may well be right for all I know, but that was then e.g. in a what was then a minor oil company, or that was then the start only of looking into the potential of the pharmaceutical industry etc. I might add all new and learning experiences, and who amongst us could, boldy state that we could suddenly start up a substantial business in one of these major industries and ensure it succeeds in it, beyond doubt, and above all without mistake, falter or change ?

In all previous alleged failed ventures, it did not at any stage include anywhere near the employment of such a highly credentialed and industry experienced ?Team?, nor the range of potentially, substantial cash earning products to be developed and marketed with the potential of more to follow ? This is the substantial difference now, and I suggest has little if any similarity to what went before in which the CEO was involved.

My biggest concern is that if you wish to make money, especially seriously money from this stock, I suggest you need to be supporting the ?Team? and the ?Products? and the ?Product Development? in order to achieve this goal. History shows even market sentiment spurred by shareholder sites can assist in destroying or at least minimizing company share prices. References can be found on many ASX and Share Trading training sites. And I simply do not care if the current CEO was replaced, or not, why would you potentially destroy such a promising company ?Team? and ?Products/Potential Products?, the associated compasnies, workers, together with sustaining a loss for the sake of apparently seeking some kind of revenge on one man ?

Whilst ramifications and explanations are not fully known or understood, naturally some would attack the spin off of interests in Telemedcare, which no doubt would be a cash cow but only slowly in the future expansion and trial of methods within the e-health system. And whilst perhaps quite possible correct, given the huge number of cash intensive projects attempted by STI, and given the current trashed share price re the potential for capital raising, seriously, ask yourself, didn?t something have to give. Didn?t there have to be some re-focus to fewer product development with other considerations as to how to fund them, which I believe this is ? Seriously, STI is a Minow in the Pharma Industry and is attempting to leap tall buildings at a single bound, with no superman and no money to pay superman to hang around and perform. Seriously what did you expect when capital raising was minimal and based around a trashed share price ? Had it been a large Pharma with cash flow, possibly all would have been achieved, life would be wonderful and we?d all be in the money. Dream on, you didn?t invest in a large Pharma, so why did you invest ?. It doesn?t take a blind man to see the difference. And again I do not support the lack of information into all that has happened from STI.

NOW, The final question : do you bury STI, myself and many other genuine investors along with it, destroy a small series of companies together with their staff, or do you give it a chance to slowly but finally achieve it?s potential and hopefully all profit from it ?

For completeness in considering the above factors I repeat below previous information in relation to the ?Team?, ?Products/Potential products?, and warnings as to the potential effect of negative posters in considering the above. Again, I warn I may be wrong, but I also warn for the above reasons, you may well have an effect on the likely outcome ?

If you have kindly had the patience to read to this level but do not wish to continue, I understand and acknowledge you kindness, but still charge you to make a non personal, non emotional decision based on the ?Team? and the ?Products/Potential Products? to support, else abstain from any negative comment, or alternatively if you must, continue to assist in destroying the CEO and hence possibly also STI, it?s companies, workers, and shareholders ?

References :

30/3/11 : Re Products, Potential Products :

1. Still very disappointing some post now on exit amounts at this time, now possibly helping to enforce a likely early upper limit should announcements be forthcoming that give rise to an increase in the sp ?

INTELL,

Well done but we need to careful not to put the cart before the horse and whilst I note it is of concern and certainly worthy of better explanation by PB at a shareholders meeting if not before ..,

However :

2.1. I also note STI's previous announcement that Network Ltd. & Ekomed LLC allegedly only have the right to distruibute in the Ukraine and some other countries.

2.2. Per your link the provided story is an announcement under Immune Network Ltd., it talks about in collaboration with Ekomed LLC and Immunitor (an apparent origin for much of the original research and development, and involving Glyne Michael TONGE, who is now at STI ?), to further develop, distribute tablet forms of Immunoxel/Dzherelo but again only appears to refer to the Ukraine, Africa and some other countries ? I also note Immunitor itself has successfully developed and marketed Atherosclerosis, Hep B, Hep C and HIV products, are at Phase 2 Tuberculosis trails, Phase 1 Trials for Cancer, Antimicrobial & Antifungal products and Preclinical on influenza.

This may or may not reflect that as PB has alleged STI has the right to US, UK, Australia, and some other countries ? And considering PB is apparently a director of Immune Network Ltd. which if you check them (Immune Network Ltd), may mean that PB may know what he is talking about ? Hence I still caution hasty judgement without more definative information or answers especially in light of the following :


2.3. I also note per the Zodiac site under current project assets which cover two mining companies and a agricutural company, then shows under "Zocap Pharma ?" :

Zodiac has joint ventured the global rights to 26 fully developed botanical products with Stirling Products Limited (ASX:STI). These products have been developed within Ukraine and Russian research institutes over the past 25 years and have historically only been sold in pharmacies throughout the Ukraine. These botanical products have many of the attributes of true pharmaceuticals and are regulated in most countries under such categories as natural remedies, food supplements or traditional medicines.

One of the key botanical product range that the joint venture is focused on introducing to global markets is Immunoxel, a proven immunomodulator and very effective complementary agent in the treatment of tuberculosis (?TB?), a highly contagious condition and major scourge within mainly developing countries and a serious health threat to the western world. Approximately a third of the world?s population now carries the TB bacteria. Extensive clinical trials show that Immunoxel significantly enhances the effects of anti-TB and anti-TB/HIV drugs and protects the liver from drug related toxicity. Importantly, Immunoxel has demonstrated significant effectiveness against the rapidly emerging drug resistant strains of TB.

The point I make from the above is that it could be a divided right to develop/distribute in different parts of the world ?

And then still under Zodiac re HDA :

2.4. Zodiac has a joint venture with Stirling Products Limited (ASX:STI) for the commercialization of the High Density Aerosol ("HDA") technology for drug delivery. Initial validation and independent testing of drug administration using prototype demonstration devices has shown the HDA technology to be highly efficient and effective in delivering drugs via inhalation. A major benefit of HDA drug administration is that it promises to provide the same efficacy as drugs taken orally, with far less active drug content, which subject to formal trial validation, should therefore increase drug safety and substantially lessen any side effects. The initial primary objective will be the substantiation of equivalency to other inhalation devices for the use of respiratory products.

The patented HDA technology offers a significant opportunity for the Zodiac/Stirling joint venture to target a multi-billion revenue market as it leverages its new technology to improve the safety profile of and thereby have the equivalent of, or rights to, a new patent to the improved performance version (subject to trial validation) of some of the world's major drugs as they come off patent.

Due to the unique performance characteristics of this technology, the HDA device is better suited to delivering a wide variety of drug applications in a more optimised and efficient manner than through oral drug administration or currently available nebulisers.

The HDA technology uses focused ultrasonic energy to form a fountain of liquid to be nebulised that produces an aerosol from the walls of the jet that self-propels at several meters per second up a chimney-like intake tube. Atomisation of the liquid occurs at the base of the jet inside the intake tube. The micro-particle aerosol is then transported to the user by positive dynamic pressure derived intrinsically from the kinetic energy of the jet. The HDA technology therefore does not require any compressed gas or fan driven airflow to transport aerosol to the user. This significantly increases the aerosol concentration by both eliminating the gas/fan dilution effect and reducing the drug loss associated with aerosol condensation inside the nebulisation chamber

AND can one presume that Zodiac knows more of which ways up with this after all they are in joint venture with STI and raised capital etc., even though PB was directly associated with them ?

Either way any substantial development or distribution rights of either/both of the above can no doubt result in serious money making, add to that the Canada plant awaiting news of a contract hopefully, the new biomedical products yet to be released (Zodiac says 26 ? ), then still potential substantial returns from Telemedcare, then even add the beauty cream and sale of bandages and wound care products, are all capable of making money.

Whilst serious clarification and explanation is required along with better management, the potential for the team and ? most of it?s products still appears viable pending any such clarification and explanation, and it still appears to me the biggest hurdle now is the same one they had before, a lack of money to more rapidly progress, some or all of above.


RE THE ?TEAM? : to save time taken from the STI site but googling will verify their credentials and history in the industry, apparently secured by Peter BOONEN ?

Peter Boonen | Managing Director
Mr. Boonen has over 30 years experience in the investment and equity markets and he has an extensive working knowledge of the pharmaceutical industry and particularly of the Company's core and joint venture products. Mr. Boonen is also the Managing Director of Zodiac Capital Limited, a Sydney based publicly listed investment group, with which Stirling Products has joint ventured its range of botanical products and its inhalation drug technology platform. Through this dual management role Mr. Boonen will guide and manage the commercialization of the products in the interests of the two partners.

Neil Covey | Executive Director of Sales & Marketing
Mr Covey, former Head of Sales and Marketing for Bayer (Australia) has a strong depth of expertise in international sales and management in the pharmaceutical and healthcare market. His previous experience includes senior sales, marketing and business development roles with companies including Astra and Knoll Pharmaceuticals. His senior management positions have included leadership roles in international marketing and project management in Europe and Asia. Neil has been responsible for the successful launch of many well known brands into the ethical, hospital, pharmacy and consumer segments of the healthcare industry.

Gulshan Jugroo | Executive Director
Mr Jugroo graduated with an Honours in Accounting (Major) and Business Information Systems (Minor) from the Middlesex University in the UK and holds a Masters of Business in Accounting from Victoria University in Melbourne , specialising in corporate forensic accounting. Mr Jugroo is the Company Secretary of a number of public companies and has previously held accounting appointments in Australia , Mauritius and the UK .

Michael Kean | CFO
Michael is a CPA, has a Bachelor of Business Degree with First Class Honours from the University of Technology in Sydney and a Graduate Certificate of Risk Management from Monash University. He further has distinction certificates in Microcomputing, Marketing Management and a sub-major in Computer Science. Michael has held positions as a tutor at the University of Technology in Sydney and as a Senior Researcher in fields including the Financial Reporting of Intangible Assets, Executive Remuneration, Voluntary Disclosure and Australian R & D. Most recently Michael over a nine-year period at ORIX Australia Corporation Ltd held roles in Corporate Management Accounting, Financial Accounting, Accounting Systems Support & Development, Internal Auditing, Risk Management and Compliance.

Professor Glyn M Tonge | PhD, DUniv, FRSM, Non Executive Director
Professor Tonge has extensive experience in the international pharmaceutical, healthcare and financial services industries. He was previously a research manager at ICI (now AstraZeneca) and with PA Consulting Group he spent a number of years in the US, Malaysia, Indonesia and Japan advising governments on healthcare & natural resources. In the 90s he was a director of Baring Brothers & Co Ltd, Baring Brothers International Ltd and ING Barings where he was global head of pharmaceuticals and healthcare and a director in corporate finance. During this period he was involved in setting up a new healthcare and life sciences venture fund with ING Barings, a German investment bank and Boehringer Mannheim (now Roche) as well as numerous M & A and IPO transactions internationally. He is a Fellow of the Royal Institution in 2004 and a Fellow of the Royal College of Medicine in 2005 and he was appointed as an advisor to the UK Ministry of Defence Scientific Advisory Board in 2006. He is a Liveryman and Freeman in the City of London.

John Diasinos | Company Secretary
Mr John Diasinos has experience in all facets of Company Secretariat, Corporate Governance, Compliance and Risk Management having worked for a number of listed entities. His most recent role before joining Stirling Products Ltd was at Trust Company Limited where he was administering the risk management in their responsible entity division for a portfolio of 14 client managed investment schemes (listed and unlisted) with over $4 billion in total fund assets. Mr Diasinos is a Fellow member of the Chartered Institute of Secretaries, Member of the National Institute of Accountants and holds a Master of Commercial Law and a Justice of the Peace.



6/4/2011 : Current assumption re announcements as at 6/4/2011 :

Finally the light at the end of the tunnel starts to appear, with potential for still perhaps initially slow but steady forward motion towards achieving cash flows and therefore subsequent support and development of serious cash flow products, in the near future, along with acknowledgement of a review in an attempt to ensure future forward planning and funding in all areas.

I may stand to be corrected, but assume that is why they would look at spinning off Telemedcare interests, no doubt for cash, allegedly involving shareholders in opportunities to participate in the companies it may be spun off to, but requires further, clearer information. Regardless it has prompted me to purchase more with a little more hard earned cash.

And whilst I am clearly disappointing that the progress announcement did not start at least a slight increase in share price, no doubt now stayed by the shareholder 0.004 cent offer, being very neglectful to the faithful shareholders, without having any attached options and I have urged them to reconsider, regardless given the future potential, I cannot help but believe the current share prices around 0.004 and 0.005 cents to be a cheap and a good opportunity to reap the benefits of future share price rises.

Lastly, simply as food for thought, I would remind those previously determined to trash the share price for what ever their motive or reason, that had it not eventuated STI would be in a position twice as good as they currently are, if the share price had remained even around 0.008 cents, we may have been looking at more future progress more quickly, and possibly even less spin off.


4/4/2011 : EG Again re shareholder effect ?

Sorry folks, did say I would not continue to debate this point, but posting once more, because I believe I attached this to the wrong thread and failed to explain one thing :

So if you are genuine and fully believe what you have expounded on this form like a broken record for months :

1. I applaud your efforts in contacting ASIC with your concerns and information and look forward to hearing any reply or outcome you may receive. (Maybe if a shareholder group were subsequently to complain about the same matters, they may become even more concerned, look at or investigate quicker and/or more thoroughly, maybe ?) And bear in mind anyone be they part of the collective or not is always free to do this.

2. If you have contacted ASIC then you have contacted the correct form to lodge complaints, neither Hotcopper itself nor ?us? members of Hotcopper can do anything to help you EXCEPT encourage the share price to rise based on the exceptional ?Team? (not CEO) and potential product development getting closer to reaction. And to any who don?t understand the word ?Team?, I apologise,

OR ? what is the opposite and what is the effect on SP

3. And no matter how you trade this stock, if you are genuine and like many of us currently stand to loose substantial amounts of money should the current indicators of recovery and progress not eventuate, unless there is something NEW to complain about, try shutting up, because were sick of the history complaints and you ARE part of the SP problem and the day/short term trading problem.
(If you too cannot get to a shareholders meeting perhaps you might like to have some shareholder representation at the meeting ?)

New = History = dictionary definition includes = The branch of knowledge that records and analyses past events, Chronological record of events, Narrative of events etc. Again apologies, but worried some may not interpret correctly.

4. And if your not, don?t get into the fruit market, because when you find one rotten apple at the bottom of the barrel, you?ll throw them all out and make a loss anyway.

5. Alternatively, if you are a day/short term trader playing the game, well nothing anyone says will make any difference and you?ll continue to use all the history and anything at all you can find to bag the company and play the game.

6. If your not part of the sp solution, you are part of the sp problem.

7. And thanks to those that at least acknowledge other?s attempts to do something.

8. Don?t plan to continue to debate all this because it is pointless.

22/3/2011 : eg earlier posting re effect negative shareholder posting etc :

And again with some posters, we just continue to get more of the same, just totally destructive, historical, nothing new, potentially brainwashing, share price obliterating, play into the hands of the day traders posting?s continues, without nary one single positive comment, nor any serious consideration for the actual damage done to the share price, and any potential for shareholders to get any reasonable chance at even a bottom level entry to a potential capital raising to ensure the survival and growth of the company and it?s products, and subsequently the recovery and or profitability of their own money.

If there is anyone at all left that doesn?t know verbatim, off by heart, what is apparently wrong with the CEO by now, he should be certified along with those that continual post it, especially after :

1. The company now finally has some capital to help it make money
2. Others have warned them of their part in the destruction of the share price
3. Others warned them of their potential to render shareholder capital raising to nul
4. Others warned them of their total inability to focus on the team (not CEO), still there and still not leaving and the products and how to get them to market

Regardless of their gripes and/or justification at some point you must accept responsibility for the part you play in success or destruction, hence if you want a company to succeed what do you do ?

Hence if for some reason they do collapse and I do suffer substantial loss, which at last looks highly unlikely, they too will be to blame right alongside the CEO.