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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MARKET INDEX TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - MITA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: High-Tech East who wrote (14609)	9/19/2002 10:02:39 AM
From: High-Tech East	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19219

Editorial comment from the Financial Times today ... I know, individual stock comments and now more macro stuff ... pleaseeeeeeeeeee, Ken, knock it off ... <g> _________________________________________ Don't ignore the current account Published: September 19 2002 5:00 \| Last Updated: September 19 2002 5:00 Ask most serious economists and they will admit to feeling pretty queasy about growing trade imbalances in rich countries. Paul O'Neill, the US Treasury secretary, disagrees. He cannot comprehend the concern about the gaping US current account deficit. "I just think it is a meaningless concept," he has said. On one level Mr O'Neill cannot be faulted. The current account deficit is just an accounting concept, which, by definition, must equal the value of foreign net capital flows to the US. According to Mr O'Neill, these flows explain everything. For him, that the current account deficit is well over 4 per cent of US gross domestic product, that it absorbs 6 per cent of global gross saving and more than 70 per cent of the world's non-domestic saving flows, simply shows how attractive investment in the US is to foreigners. But this mantra represents the triumph of blinkered assertion over evidence. It fails to explain why the deficit grew in the 1990s, whether it is sustainable and how it might unwind. Fortunately, the International Monetary Fund published a valuable contributed to the debate yesterday. It concludes that global current account imbalances matter, that their present levels are unlikely to be sustained and that the world should worry about a rapid correction. Comparing relative movements in saving and investment across countries in the 1990s, the IMF study shows that the growth of the US current account deficit was initially driven by an increase in US private investment. But since 1999 its subsequent expansion has reflected higher consumption and lower relative private saving rates. Fast US growth and buoyant expectations of future profitability of investment led to capital inflows, a rising dollar and the growing current account deficit. Unfortunately, few of these trends are likely to last. First, we now know that the investment associated with the technology revolution was nowhere near as profitable as was thought, casting doubt on the levels of future US investment and hence the financing of the deficit. Second, by 2007 US net liabilities to the rest of the world would be an unprecedented 40 per cent of GDP. And third, history shows that large deficits are not generally sustained for long. The unwinding of the US current account deficit could be slow and benign. If domestic demand were to grow fast, particularly in Europe and Japan, world output would expand as the imbalances shrank. The trouble is that an alternative unpleasant correction looks more likely. In this scenario, revised expectations of US growth prospects would cause lower US consumption, imports and growth; and a sharply lower dollar would export some of the pain to Europe and Japan. news.ft.com

To: High-Tech East who wrote (14609)	9/19/2002 8:48:04 PM
From: Tickertype	Respond to of 19219

<<If I can explain the 'glitch' as a non-technical person, the company discovered that the new battery sometimes had serious performance problems (not safety related) if it was stored for lengthy periods without first having been broken-in or if it was left in direct sunlight for lengthy periods.>> Looks like they encountered two problems - one related to the N-Charge, and the other to the battery. The case of the N-Charge apparently heats up if exposed to direct sunlight for a prolonged period, which could possibly create a thermal problem with some component on the circuit board, or the internal temperature of the N-Charge could exceed the rated level of the battery which is 60 degrees C as I recall. Avoiding exposure to direct sunlight should avoid this, although the interior of a vehicle can also get very hot in some parts of the country. The glitch which would be more directly attributable to the battery apparently relates to the 'break-in' requirement you refer to, i.e. leaving it in the discharged state for several months. That's what the company reported. According to some unconfirmed reports, this can cause outgassing and swelling of the battery. Apparently this has now been resolved. - T -

To: High-Tech East who wrote (14609)	9/19/2002 11:36:04 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19219

High tech, they have $7 MM on hand (after raising another $15 MM last quarter), they burn (without going into production) $10 MM per quarter, they will need at least another $50 MM if all assumptions are right about solving technical glitches (and this company has a 10 years history of glitches, to me it indicates something is fishy with the technology, not necessarily the people running it). That means two things, a reverse split and before that some 100 MM shares. Do you think they have a good chance to reach $100 MM in sales ($1/share) in let say three years? If they do, they need another $35 MM or so in working capital (and I am assuming that they have the equipment for that sales rate, which is not that sure since they junked a bunch of the equipment they got. This company has gone through $350 MM of OPM and have nothing to show for it, I doubt they will survive. Zeev