Hi, William,
I certainly appreciate your hard-nosed businessman's approach to
evaluating Valence's circumstances. It is a useful counterweight to
the thread's tendency to overanalyze and extrapolate each news
event well beyond its likely ability to support the conclusions.
Still, I think there is a reason for such speculation, beyond the
entertainment value it supplies while we wait. The reason is to try
to bound the scale and timing of the potential "reward" in light of
the significant(!) risk the stock now poses. The thoughtful bears,
and the cautious bulls, point to currently precarious finances,
potential dilution, potential competition, uncertain adoption rates,
and so forth. Given the occurrence of any of these risks could
quickly drive the stock price toward zero, the scale and timing of
the reward is clearly relevant.
In this light, I don't understand your message 11495 where you
indicated a "share price of 12-13 by early next year" would be a
"very fine return on my money." Is such a relatively paltry reward
in light of the risks consistent with your "hard-nosed
businessman's" approach to the stock? I have to think the market
offers many other opportunities to gain an 85% return with
substantially less risk. How do you justify investing in Valence if
the potential reward is so small when the risks are so great? Have
your posts omitted other aspects of your thinking about Valence?
Regards, lws
PS. I believe it was you who was wondering why a message had been directed at him. It is convenient, and so common practice on the thread, to create new messages by simply "responding" to the last message posted. The writer of the last message is not necessarily the intended target. |
