SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Energy Conversion Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jayreynolds who wrote (5426)10/16/2000 11:17:54 PM
From: Steve  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8393
 
PS. The obvious question I saw when getting on board this Feb (concurrent with pullback after Intel partnership PR) - why invest in a company 40 years old that's gone nowhere ? Answer - Bob Stempel. Loook at the restructuring and cash that's come into ECD since he arrived. Well worth the $4m in stock he got when he joined last year. He is Stan Ovshinsky's business-savvy alter ego.

ECD partners with industry giants without giving away the crown jewels, and is worth its current value for any one of several strands that are on the brink (read 6-24 months) of mass-market explosion.



To: jayreynolds who wrote (5426)10/17/2000 4:00:44 PM
From: Allan Harris  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8393
 
You are clearly not an idiot

Thanks Jay, I needed that, and thanks to all for your public and private replies to my post. Maybe I can give back a little:

My charts are actually constructive for ENER, just not as constructive as they are for BLDP, FCEL and APWR. In fact, taking out 34 would project ENER to 45, basis my chart interpretation and probably much higher. Which brings me to yet another observation:

If all the apparent good things about ENER were recognized by market, it would probably not be selling at 31 1/2. In fact, it may not be selling under triple digits and ENER's market cap of $600M versus BLDP's $8B leaves a lot of room for "recognition."

A