Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg McDaniel who wrote (13417)	7/26/1999 10:14:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Respond to of 27311

Greg, the "nefarious" type bandits are not limited by that "ownership" boundary of 4.9%, they never actually own 4.9% since in the floorless scenario, to the extent they convert at all, it is done to deliver shares shorted before, so they never hold the shares. What will CC do, I know not. Zeev

To: Greg McDaniel who wrote (13417)	7/26/1999 10:47:00 PM
From: Rich Wolf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Greg, the whole floorless scenario requires that CC would have sold short the shares at a much higher price, so their profit has two components: the shorted shares (profit=sale price less conversion price) and the 'extra' new shares that would be acquired by converting below the fixed conversion price. But if they drive the price to zero and bankrupt a company, the extra shares are worthless. And the OTHER 2/3 of their shares are equally worthless. (They are committed to prices of $6.03 and $6.78, w/ extra deflation factor of 6%, for the original $7.5M tranche and for the 900,000 warrants, respectively.) The thesis that CC would even desire to drive the stock down as low as some suggest is ridiculous: they cannot recover the other 2/3 of their investment, and the gain is highly limited on the variably converted shares. The more reasonable thesis is that since Valence's factory is a highly valuable revenue generator, CC does better by staying long and selling at shareprices of 15 or 24 or 40 (likely at the first spike, after the first big PO, and within a year of the first big PO, respectively). Only time will tell. If Berg is supporting the stock here, that will be very bullish for the street, and CC will be covering here (IF they still have a net short position at all... which would be an extreme assumption to make). Those holding naked short positions (of which I speculate there are 1.5 to 2 million shares) are in an extremely vulnerable position.