To: MHS who wrote (13783 ) 8/17/1999 1:43:00 PM From: Rich Wolf Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 27311
Minor correction to John's CC notes: I will refer to my tape of the call later, to provide an exact quote (unless someone else can beat me to it), but my recollection of the sequence of questions was not quite as you noted. I believe Lev had just mentioned that Valence had a product in beta in the far east, but upon query as to whether that was Samsung, he replied that 'OUR beta is not with Samsung.' I recall my reaction at that point in time to his answer (however phrased) was not that there was no relation present, but that it seemed that he had very carefully phrased an answer to a different question. There was inadequate follow-through on this line of questions, and Lev also made clear that he was not going to answer any question about a specific customer. I would note that Samsung is Hanil's customer, and any shipments from Valence to Samsung would be for Hanil's account (not Valence's). Hence, strictly speaking, it would be Hanil's beta, not Valence's. I would also remark that in May, after the Wireless Week article came out that mentioned Valence, Hanil, and Samsung (without making a direct connection between Samsung and Valence or Hanil Valence), a call to Valence in Henderson reached Roy Wright, who confirmed that Valence had shipped cells to Samsung for testing, *on behalf of Hanil*. I would further note that John's notes later missed the comment that Valence would not only second-source Hanil, but would ship 'to Hanil's customers on their behalf, until they were ready to ship themselves.' Note the phrasing used here. Heck, for all we know, Samsung is 'out of beta', heh!