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: rli123 who wrote (22316)	11/14/2000 1:41:09 PM
From: Dennis V.	Respond to of 27311

Thanks rli, I can never remember the name of that company. It used to be loosely referred to as "Dr Goodenough's group" after the inventor whom is largely responsible for the Co electrode. I believe the Harwell outfit is the right one, however. I heard they were receiving $600 million annually. Not necessarily reliable number.

To: rli123 who wrote (22316)	11/14/2000 2:13:36 PM
From: John Curtis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

RLI: Thanks for that information. Having a few spare moments to dedicate to watching VLNC's growing volume, and then using those moments to contemplate my navel over what this volume could mean I have come to this. The short position has had its final logical legs cut out from under it with this Telecordia agreement. At least to the extent all lith-poly patent roads converge and now run through the VLNC "crossroads." So although there's still time remaining because VLNC must now put closure to the licensee issue, end game from the short standpoint needs to be considered and probably implemented. But because there's still a few months time left, end-game from their vantage point can be completed in a panic free fashion. Soooooo.....all else being equal I wouldn't be surprised to see average daily volume increase in size, with the price floating up some days and briefly nailed down on others, but with a positive bias for an indeterminate amount of time into the future. If this happens then I'd also look to see the size of the short position to begin to dwindle month over month. Bottom line? Although there's still that outside chance the more emotionally committed of the shorts will hang to the bitter end, the odds are this short position won't be the "rocket boost" others have hoped. BUT. If this is the case this still isn't a bad thing. Indeed, it might be a BETTER thing, as at the least it supports a VLNC valuation right around where it is now, and at its best it'll provide a constant, over-all positive pressure to the stock price going forward. So after all this time it looks to have come down to this. In every war there comes a decisive moment, which swings the balance in favor of one side or another. Looking back a year from now we just might find the Telecordia agreement was just such a decisive event, with it swinging the balance to the longs camp. And of course this is barring any further general market mischief to roil the waters, or any competitive advances which might negate the Telecordia advantage...... Thoughts on this folks?? John~

To: rli123 who wrote (22316)	11/14/2000 2:36:46 PM
From: Rich Wolf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

OT re: AEA, my memory was that the Goodenough patents on cobalt oxide materials were owned by the British Atomic Energy Association. Goodenough is now at U of Texas, Austin (last I heard), and his recent patent on 'lithium-containing phosphates' is identical to the patent obtained by Barker for Valence. It is unknown whether these two patented materials yield comparable results, don't count out a Goodenough end-around. I noted here some months ago that the chemical compounds are identical except in the ordering of the elements. The same patent examiner granted these two patents, Valence's preceded the Goodenough by 6 months. Re: the size of royalties paid to AEA, there were rumors of billions of dollars, others claim it is far less. I recall Zeev weighed in on this. Also, Valence does not have an exlusive patent on manganese dioxide either, I tracked one down that is owned by Matsushita. I also noted that NEC's US subsidiary has been making manganese li-ion cells recently. The waters are murky. One certainty, Valence needed the Bellcore patent to make their own set complete.

To: rli123 who wrote (22316)	11/14/2000 8:55:21 PM
From: P. Ramamoorthy	Respond to of 27311

rli123, Re.:"...as power hand tools (drills, etc.) and auto batteries..." A few qualifiers from Lev's cc. (1) hand tools - the PO or announcement should be coming any time, if we believe Lev. Hand tools application requires high current draw from the battery. Based on Lev's history, he would only tell us the good news until VLNC passed this test. We'll know sooner or later. (2) Automotive use - The key word here is high temperature usage. If you recall conf calls about 6 months ago, Lev made a big point about recharging gel can batteries and the temperature sensitivity and the hazards of runaway reactions, during the recharge cycle of those batteries. (BTW, recall the two laptop PC explosions from Dell and Compaq) The automotive usage will demonstrate the advantages of VLNC battery technology (probably the PO4's which can be environmentally friendly). Wait until 2003 or 2005(?) to share the royalty. Ram