VALENCE TECHNOLOGY (VLNC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : VALENCE TECHNOLOGY (VLNC)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: John Curtis who wrote (1235)	11/1/1997 11:32:00 AM
From: FMK	Read Replies (1) of 27311

How conservative IS the Red Chip Review article? (Thanks John,for your summary.) Here are some of my recent numbers and assumptions. Machine Capacity - During the July conf. call, Cal Reed stated the production rate for the high speed lines is 240 bi-cells/minute and cellphone batteries require 10 bi-cells each. It was very straightforward to conclude that the each high speed line can produce 24 cellphone cells per minute. The Laptop capacity was more tricky to determine, and the best I could do from the conf call data was to start with the statement that it requires 4 to 6 bi-cells for a laptop cell. The mid-range figure results in 48 cells/min. I divided by 3 cells/battery for the 16 batteries/minute that corresponds with the rate indicated by Mooter in post #774. If the machines were run 360 days per year and 22.5 hours per day, they would operate 486,000 minutes/year. Maximum rates would work out to 11.66 million cellphone batteries and 7.78 million laptop batteries per year. This is substantially lower than the approximately 20 million and 10 million per year the company had indicated in February. The article stated the cellphone capacity as 7-8 million per year, or about 2/3 of the reduced recent maximum. Sales price - Valence's May '97 spec sheets (after which considerable improvements have reportedly been made) indicate 3.8 volts x 1350 ma-hr = 5.13 watt-hr per cell for cellphones and 3.8 volts x 4.7 amp-hr = 17.86 watt-hr per cell for Laptops at slightly less than 300 recharges at 80%. Over a year ago we were using $2 per watt hr as an estimated sales price to OEM's. As pointed out by Javelyn Bjoli in post #1210, "They will only be able to get $1.50/W-hr by the time they ship." Applying this low value of $1.50/ watt-hr to the May '97 specs results in sales prices of $7.69 each for cellphones and $27 each for laptops. I believe the watt-hr capacities have improved at least 10% since May which would correlate with Mooter's recent conclusion that sales prices should be approximately $9 or $10 for cellphones and over $30 for cellphones. So how conservative were Red Chip's estimates? I AM EXTEMELY PLEASED with their conclusion that the company would be profitable at the end of next year with only 3 (of the likely 5 or 6 lines) running 50% of 1 shift per day at about 2/3 maximum capacity at 80% of the likely sales prices with only 15 to 34.5% profit margin! What makes it even better, is my belief that they have may have neglected the $32 million rebate from the Irish Govt and assumed much higher U.S. taxes while the Irish rate is approx only about 2.7%! Does anyone have more recent or more accurate data? Again, I encourage anyone to do his own calculations as the above numbers represent the best I could do with the information I was able to acquire. Please refer also to my post # 1209. Regards, FMK

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next