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: Larry Brubaker who wrote (10450)	4/15/1999 4:12:00 PM
From: Rich Wolf	Read Replies (3) of 27311

Larry, as I recall that language was a revision of the same content in the previous s-3's. As you well know, most of the amendments we saw being made to the original s-3's (from Sept and from Dec) were not changes in content, but rewording and restructuring of the organization of the documents. These revisions were clearly at the behest of the SEC, and most likely in response to their recent directive concerning the use of 'plain English' language. In short, to make them more readable. Again, I assert there was no change in the content of the message conveyed, and the revisions were prepared by the lawyers hired to file the SEC documents. This was the guidance given us when we queried the FRB about some of this language earlier in the year. But you're working awfully hard to find something to cling to, in hopes that they're really not doing what Lev said they would: produce batteries, in quantity, in this timeframe. I suggest to you that the bulk of the evidence supports being long the stock at this point in time. I suggest you'd get a better 'return on your investment (of time)' if you just bought the stock and quit hoping it'd go down before you bought in. FWIW.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next