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: Dennis V. who wrote (20896)	8/6/2000 5:07:56 PM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

There have been no orders by any OEMs that suggest VLNC credibility is no longer an issue. Globalstar is an unmitigated failure. A business model depending on sales of units in the "thousands," as opposed to "millions," will not go far. As for other wireless OEMs, the market is saying that VLNC either has no significant orders, is uncertain to deliver, or both. As for laptop OEMs, the best VLNC can say apparently is that OEMs are looking at the product. No commitments there, not even small ones. There is no evidence that VLNC can compete. Its failures in the past denigrate from its receiving the benefit of any doubt. That is VLNC's loss. The failures bear a heavy cost. That is why good management holds its credibility so high and guards against losing it. Under-represent and over-deliver is their practice, not the opposite. In fairness to the VLNC management, judging its credibility based on what thread regulars such as mooter, fmk, wolf, and klemencic, to name the most flagrant "artists," have attributed to VLNC management is an invitation to serious error. For example, it has been represented here at different times that VLNC would rely on a licensing model and not invest in a direct sales model. At other times the opposite strategy has been pinned to VLNC management. To take what these people represent at face value would discredit VLNC management. Apparently the VLNC CEO made a reference to this issue in a previous CC. I do not blame him for that.