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.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert Cohen who wrote (7689)	1/2/2001 2:31:15 PM
From: Brad Davies	Respond to of 10293

Robert, Thanks for your response. I am not an expert on their technology, but rather a cynic with respect to any company that professes to have leading edge technology, but is unable to capitalize on it for many years. I believe in VLNC's case it has been about 10 years, but I stand to be corrected on that. I do know they have accumulated a very substantive deficit in pursuing the commercialization of this technology, and have been promising that they will be profitable and failing to deliver for a long time. In my mind, these types of facts are the hallmark of a good short opportunity. That is why I have been (not currently) on the short side. As I mentioned in my earlier post to Bill, I believe they will have some announcements to make to pump the stock (that is another hallmark of a good short...they are in the business of generating press releasers rather than revenue), followed by another disappointing quarter. If I am right, then later in January or February, will be the opportune time to reshort them. My main concern has been that I will miss the opportunity to short them if they preannounce a cash shortfall. By my analysis they burn about 9M a quarter and had 8.8 as of September 30. If Berg's line of credit is available that would be enough to keep them afloat for another quarter. I would question whether anyone would promise to keep a public company afloat with his own cash if it continues to lose money indefinitely. Rich people don't stay rich very long with that perspective. With respect to their technology, even though I am not an expert, I do know that the technology has been widely nown about and available for licence for quite some time. If it so worthwhile, why haven't Sony or any of the other major potential customers looked to acquire it? After all, it would be a very small acquisition for them? Any of the electronic companies that could get an advantage on the others would obviously love to do so. In any event, I always enjoy intelligent debate, and I am sure we can all learn from differing opinions.