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: kolo55 who wrote (15164)	10/9/1999 5:30:00 PM
From: Razorbak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Insolvency Paul & Mark: As long as you guys are debating insolvency, you should both do so with the following information in mind. Insolvency is usually determined in one of two ways: The 1898 Act captured these two notions of insolvency and they remain in common use. A firm is insolvent "in the equity sense" if it is unable to pay its debts as they come due. It is insolvent "in the bankruptcy sense," if its debts, fairly valued, exceed its assets, fairly valued. In the Bankruptcy Code, "insolvent" typically means liabilities, fairly valued, in excess of assets, fairly valued. §101(32). Insolvency in the equity sense enters into the Code indirectly. A debtor may defeat an involuntary petition by showing, among other things, that it is paying its debts as they come due. §303(h). Note that nowhere is one bound by what the balance sheet says. -- "The Elements of Bankruptcy, Revised Edition," Douglas G. Baird, The Foundation Press, Inc., Westbury, New York, ©1992 & 1993, pg 73.

To: kolo55 who wrote (15164)	10/9/1999 9:13:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Take some accounting then understand what negative working capital signifies. Then read my post again. Then look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself where you went wrong. Then ask yourself why big oil told you not to let the door hit you on the way out. I made no "charge," it is serious but it is a product of reading VLNC's balance sheet. One more thing - Why do you suppose Dawson expressly indicated he wanted to get the share price up from February levels before selling shares to raise needed capital? Once you have the answer, ask yourself why they are selling shares now at prices up to 50%+ lower. Do you think its because events are going they way they planned? You are out of your league.