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: I. N. Vester who wrote (19090)	4/8/2000 3:43:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

IN, I do not get any information except news releases and very late SEC documents. If you go back into this thread before we broke $26 or so, you will see that I bought at $27.5 and did not sell on the rally to $33, fully expecting the resistance at $34 to be taken out. If I knew an attack was imminent, it sure did not show in the TA, I would have sold as I did many times before, instead, I stayed and bailed out below my stop, and that only because of the gap down. As for why CC did not run the ride from $7 to $40, I really do not know if they did or not, I would not be surprised if they held their position just under 5% so as to avoid reporting (as they have always done). The fact is that their conversion and the big reduction in short coincided very well with the bottom in the stock, telling objective observers that they knew few things before we did. I had to wait up to the breaching of $7 (last November) before my indicators became bullish. With advanced knowledge, I would have bought in the $4 to $5 area (and could end up in jail for using inside information, which I did not). I think that my position on this stock has been made quite clear a number of times, my entries and exits are always rationalized at the time (and in hindsight, these rationalizations, unfortunately, are not always "that rational"), so I fail to understand your reaction to a post addressed to Larry, which starts with, "here is a scenario where I can see $50 to $65 VLNC" (VBG). Why are you not commenting on my "positive findings", there is a danger in blinded and in love with a stock, and frankly, just as I can see a scenario where we go to $50, I can also see a scenario where we go to single digits. My tactic is very simple, I do not mind missing the first few bucks of a run to $50, and would rather take few bucks losses and not ride down with the stock to single digits, which is exactly what I have been doing and posting for quite some time. Not all of us are "Buy and hold" come whatever. Zeev

To: I. N. Vester who wrote (19090)	4/8/2000 4:25:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

<<Or do you also have contacts like your pal Larry on the short's fax list?>> IN Vestor. I have no contacts with any "short coalition." You are making groundless accusations that are bordering on slander. I doubt that such a fax exists in the first place. mooter, who first claimed the existance of such a fax, said he would post it on the thread. He has never done so. I for one, would like to see the contents of this alleged fax. Where's the fax, mooter?