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: Larry Brubaker who wrote (16250)	11/17/1999 11:20:00 PM
From: mooter775	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Larry, You said, "Lev said they wouldn't have the equipment to do a $ 250 mm run rate until sometime in 2001" Where did he say this? I was under the impression that he and others have said that he would have that equipment in place sometime in Q4 2000. I believe if you or others call the company, you will find out that the equipment was in fact already ordered several weeks ago, in conjunction with a similar order from Hanil. On another topic, the company on several occasions has estimated a breakeven of approximately $ 40 mm per annum or $ 10 mm/quarter. If this is correct, then I would guess that the remaining $ 160 mm in a $ 200 mm 2001 would have a gross profit of 65% and a pretax profit of at least 40%. The tax rate should be less than 20% (NI VAT and Grand Caymens incorporation), which should leave a 30% after tax margin on the incremental $ 160 mm or somewhere in excess of $ 1.00/share fully diluted eps. These estimates, of course, exclude joint venture and licensing income, which I expect we will see in 2000 and 2001. These are, of course, rough guesstimates, but the bottom line, I believe, is that operating performance will surprise investors, assuming they can attain the requisite revenue growth.

To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (16250)	11/17/1999 11:39:00 PM
From: Mark Johnson	Respond to of 27311

Poor noway/Larry.... so loose with the semantics. Hanil didn't say they were "into production" until their last news release, where they had "begun" production. They only "planned" production Larrrr...what part of that don't you understand? Message 11832497 Besides who cares what they "said" lets hear about what they're gonna do. Larry you're a pathological spinmeister deliberately trying to obfuscate the issue. You do give me a good laugh, and it's fun to see you squirm... See ya...No! who?.....

To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (16250)	11/17/1999 11:57:00 PM
From: Mark Johnson	Respond to of 27311

Sorry thread....I know it's childish (but humorous)... here is a repost from last summer..... from marginally on Yahoo to Larry/noway: <<<<But since it is you, and you like to crow whenever you can count a 20/20 hindsight coup on just any WAG...based on your private assumptions, which are based on your opinions, which are based on your perceptions regarding the importance of your assumptions... You just are making a really WAG...bonehead. No make that a transparent, two-faced, WAG-guessing, bonehead. BTW, you know the drill... M IMO, you are far too self-absorbed to be a paid shill. You are just another public joke. You know the saying, "Fools names...yada, yada,...public places." >>>

To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (16250)	11/18/1999 12:51:00 AM
From: I. N. Vester	Respond to of 27311

Larry, you're the one with the heartburn over my pointing out your continuing failure to add any revenue from Hanil. You're so focused on the boogie monsters you've been looking for (massive dilution etc etc) that you fail to draw the right conclusion from your own analysis! As I pointed out, it's not unreasonable to multiply Valence earnings estimates multiply by 1.5 to account Hanil growing at the same rate as vlnc and having close to the same starting capacity and adding at the same rate. This is consistant with their published plans Let's take your analysis and accept your premises for the sake of argument, (except that I think we'll have at most one more warbucks financing per Lev and I'd figure 40 million shares). You gave us .89 annual eps for 2001, excluding Hanil revenues. Multiply by 1.5 for full earnings including Hanil = 1.33. That's what we expect to make in 2001. Let's not forget that under these assumptions we had a 300% yty earnings increase. That should justify at least a 30 forward PE on a bad day. So that gives a target of $39 on or about 1/2001. Let's see that's a 500% return on a share bought for $8 today. This is not a risk free investment, Larry, but you've given us a target of a 5-bagger in one year. Of course Valence has to execute, but even if they're slow by a quarter or 2, well I can wait 18 months instead of a year for $39/share. You obviously have at least some idea of the upside potential otherwise you would waste so much time here. You just want a written guarantee that things are moving along as well as management has told you. That will come but at a much higher price. I'm sure you're so cautious that you will keep waiting and sniping. Our party will continue apace with or without you. Keep pissing in the wind Larry if you enjoy it so much.