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: John Curtis who wrote (1183)	10/23/1997 9:43:00 PM
From: FMK	Respond to of 27311

This is in response to a post on AOL recently echoed here. Tackman, My apologies for taking so long to respond- I have not been at a location to connect lately or found time. Before my previous post I was told that many of Valence's lower-cost MnO2 production samples were testing above 500 recharges at 80% but "not consistently, and with varying results based on the battery type". I understand that 2 or 3 test cycles per day or more can be performed, depending on the rate of discharge. My interpretation was that the average was at or slightly above 500. If 500 then half of the samples would be below and half would be above this average, except for those that were exactly 500. If the standard deviation were 40 recharges, then the average would have to be 540 for 87% of them to be above 500 etc. I recently noticed product data sheets on VLNC'S website dated 5/97. Graphs for each of the two battery types indicated slightly less than 300 recharges at 80%. I understood that there has been considerable progress since, resulting in the 500 number. From the amp-hr figures, voltage, weights and dimensions I calculated 142 watt-hr/Kg and 270 wh/Liter for the 4040 (4x4 inch laptop cells) and 145 watt-hr/Kg and 244 wh/liter for the 360965 (36x9x65mm) cellphone cells. These specific energies were slightly higher than what I noted about 8 months ago and believe they have since improved together with the number of recharges since 5/97. Re your: "Do you have a sense for how many cycles are necessary to have confidence in the extrapolation, and how long this would take? This would give us some sense for the earliest possible date that the OEM's might qualify VLNC's product." This is a tough one to answer because it depends on the number of cells tested (sample size) as well as the number of cycles. I heard several weeks ago that an OEM had extensively tested LI polymer samples from 3 vendors and found Valence's product clearly superior. I believe these were "semi-automatic" samples from line 1. The information was, admittedly, third hand, but It seemed to occur a few weeks after the line's fine tuning results were acceptable at a reduced speed for cellphone cells and the line was to be converted for laptops. These results compare with the Dept of Defense evaluations of the Alliant-Valence LLC joint venture's products resulting in contracts with the Army and Navy. The company has been careful not to divulge who has received samples and when. I believe we have moved within the time-frame for an OEM to be satisfied with the quality of Valence's product. The OEM's criteria may have shifted to available quantities and delivery dates and the company's to which OEM and application to allocate resources for. As you know, the company has stated for some time that it can sell all it can produce. Regarding "leapfrogging by competing technologies", I have believed for some time that LI-Polymer should have a lifetime similar to its predecessors including NiCd and Nickel metal hydride(NiMh). The intermediate step is Lithium Ion (liquid electrolyte in metal cans) that is now the best currently available for portable devices. I spoke today with an attendee of a battery show last week who told me that several Japanese companies now producing L-Ion batteries intend to become capable of supplying the next generation (Solid Polymer) technology and have listed it during their presentations as a separate category following NiCad, NiMh, and Li-ion. I believe it will be around long enough for stockholders of the first company capable of mass producing it be handsomely rewarded! Regards, FMK

To: John Curtis who wrote (1183)	10/23/1997 11:37:00 PM
From: Tickertype	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

A little lifeboat, John? How about the stately ship Valence Technology, cruising steady as she goes, while the passengers seem to be doing a little snoozing right now. IOM finally recovered a few points, enough for me to sell some for a slim profit, after which I went right over to the VLNC store and traded the proceeds for a few more tickets to their cruise at $8.25 each. I'd say the stock is now definitely in "stronger hands", as it's holding very steady in these stormy seas. There are some real indications that the on-board party will begin before the year is over - I think the captain will get out his bullhorn and make some interesting announcements by then. Time for everyone to be on board! Regards, - T -