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 : ULBI..Ultralife Batteries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Justin Pressley who wrote (144)	12/7/1997 11:42:00 AM
From: FMK	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 522

This was in response to a post on the VLNC thread. The poster mentioned the ULBI thread was inactive and it was more appropriate therefore to discuss ULBI on the VLNC thread. Perhaps this will get some ULBI discussion going over here! Other than share pricing, my info on ULBI is 3 weeks old. Javelyn, Your reference to ULBI and William Sharp's post reminded me of a comparison I had recently made. As of 3 weeks ago ULBIs line 1 had not been shipped from the Florida mfr. At that time I was told by a large shareholder that they have no additional lines on order, such as VLNC's high-speed Italian lines. In a prior post, I stated my expectation that VLNC should have their line 1 plus 3 high-speed lines by the end of Q1 '98. Each high-speed line has over twice the capacity of the low-speed line and the first 4 lines therefore have the capacity of 7 times line 1 and therefore 7 times the capacity of ULBI's line 1. This translated to 7 x 8.9/22.7 or 2.74 times the production capability on a per share basis. With Bill's added perspective using current share pricing, a dollar invested in Valence would buy $16/$6 x 2.74 or 16.4 times the solid-polymer production capability . Timing for the 3rd Italian line is now uncertain, so looking more near term, Bill used only two Valence high-speed lines in his calculations to conclude that Valence had 5 x 8.9/22.7 or 1.96 times the production capability on a per share basis. A dollar invested in Valence would then purchase just a little over 5 times the solid-polymer production capability as a dollar invested in ULBI. If ULBI is fairly priced at $16/share, and Valence spokesmen have confirmed that their high-speed lines are capable of running at full capacity, Valence must be tremendously undervalued! This was in response to a post on the VLNC thread. The poster mentioned the ULBI thread was inactive and it was more appropriate therefore to discuss ULBI on the VLNC thread. Javelyn, Your reference to ULBI and William Sharp's post reminded me of a comparison I had recently made. As of 3 weeks ago ULBIs line 1 had not been shipped from the Florida mfr. At that time I was told by a large shareholder that they have no additional lines on order, such as VLNC's high-speed Italian lines. In a prior post, I stated my expectation that VLNC should have their line 1 plus 3 high-speed lines by the end of Q1 '98. Each high-speed line has over twice the capacity of the low-speed line and the first 4 lines therefore have the capacity of 7 times line 1 and therefore 7 times the capacity of ULBI's line 1. This translated to 7 x 8.9/22.7 or 2.74 times the production capability on a per share basis. With Bill's added perspective using current share pricing, a dollar invested in Valence would buy $16/$6 x 2.74 or 16.4 times the solid-polymer production capability . Timing for the 3rd Italian line is now uncertain, so looking more near term, Bill used only two Valence high-speed lines in his calculations to conclude that Valence had 5 x 8.9/22.7 or 1.96 times the production capability on a per share basis. A dollar invested in Valence would then purchase just a little over 5 times the solid-polymer production capability as a dollar invested in ULBI. If ULBI is fairly priced at $16/share, and Valence spokesmen have confirmed that their high-speed lines are capable of running at full capacity, Valence must be tremendously undervalued!