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: Mark Johnson who wrote (3199)	6/30/1998 9:48:00 AM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) of 27311

Fred, you wrote: "I agree, the 10k was not worded with the intent to induce readers to invest in the company. I believe it is a legal requirement that they list all forseable ways things could go wrong. It doesn't mean that they are expected to. " The fact is that both 10ks and 10qs are neither intended to persuade or dissuade investment. They are intended to protect investors by requiring the company to report objectively as possible on the current state of affairs. Take a look at my post to Kaimes regarding the distinction between factual statements and boilerplate as reported in the 10K. I have to say I am surprised at the perceptions stated by you and other VLNC defenders on what 10Ks and 10Qs are. I'm also a little surprised at the defensiveness and nastiness of some of the responses to my posts. It may be unusual to post as many times as I have this evening without an ulterior pecuniary motive, of that I really don't know but, I do know that I have posted many times more than I anticipated because of the honest and strong disagreements I have about the legitimate information role of 10Ks and Qs. In the end, this debate isn't so much about VLNC as it is the misperceptions about these documents.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next