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: mooter775 who wrote (1465)	11/30/1997 11:42:00 AM
From: John Curtis	Respond to of 27311

Mooter: Thanks for the info., and Jian, thanks for the EV news. That Lith. Poly EV range of 150 to 200 miles doesn't quite meet ENER's recent NiMhd EV test drive from Boston to NYC, with charge to spare, of a production passenger car. But it's a good beginning. Lith-Poly may have a future in EV's longer term, if they can handle discharge rates, etc., simply because of their malleability, light weight, etc.. On another note, yep, MM to MM transactions are most certainly part of the daily volume count. I've often felt, as a stock market "consumer," that we'd all be better served by the NASDAQ segmenting that daily volume indicator into 2 components: 1) actual buy/sell volume and, 2) MM to MM volume. From that it'd be possible to develope some kind of ratio predictor as to MM manipulati.....eh.......activity. But what am I saying, this is the NASDAQ, what're the odds they'd entertain giving us consumers that kind of tool, eh? Meanwhile, I agree with you, Mooter. I, too, am screamingly bullish on VLNC's '98 prospects. Regards! John~

To: mooter775 who wrote (1465)	11/30/1997 2:51:00 PM
From: Paul Dubsky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

I, too, thank you for your informative posts. It's reassuring to hear such good progress being made and that, as of yet, the company is not hedging its bets about Q198 production by the fact that they're still maintaining that schedule. I'm not sure how you're able to come across such informative information, but presume it's stuff that the money manager's and large institutional investors have access too. It's especially important with a company such as VLNC for information to be distributed via discussion threads such as SI because there's not much of a following by the traditional press on these small caps. I remain bullish and hope that my $6.50 limit order executes tomorrow to pick up some cheaper shares. If not, I'm not chasing it up as I'm already adequately loaded in VLNC shares! A couple comments..... 1) VLNC is a Russell 2000 index component. I know this is old news, but find it particularly interesting given that the company has no material revenues (what money they do receive from their partners is offset against R&D). Tells me that the professional boys think that VLNC will one day be a formidable force in their industry. 2) The Asian market debacle is providing potential VLNC holders with an unbelievable short term buying opportunity. Sure, short term, prospects don't look good for the Hanil-Valence JV because of the South Korean market meltdown and their supposedly need for $60 Billion in IMF aid. But, this is short term. There is nothing to indicate that long term, this market will prosper, and prosper greatly. The population there is well educated, hard working, and big savers. Also, the spotligt is primarily on the financial houses, not the industries that Hanil Telecom is in. They should be reasonably ok. 3) If there was anything that was substantive behind the recent price fall (basically 30% in a month, from $9s to the $6s), then I'd presume that management would have been out with it by now. Otherwise, they'd open themselves up to more lawsuits. Think about it. If there was a material flaw in VLNCs production capabilities and the news got out, causing the price fall from $9 to $6 by those selling with access to the news, then us regular Joe Smoes would have an excellent case against VLNC for not properly informing ALL shareholders of relevent news. You think that VLNC would try to prevent against even the potential of another lawsuit after going through what they did with the last one. They certainly have not hyped their product this time around. However, just as hyping a product is cause for a lawsuit, so is failure to properly inform investors of negative news as well. So, I really don't think there's anything substantive out there. 4) It's ALWAYS darkest right before the dawn. I know that it sounds trite to use such an analogy to VLNC. But, if MM manipulation is partially to account for the recent sell off, they may be wanting to load up at the cheap and are causing this recent drift. Again, mooter, thanks for your contributions and please update us on any new developments. I remain bullish and hope for better days ahead.

To: mooter775 who wrote (1465)	11/30/1997 5:41:00 PM
From: wm sharp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Thread - This news regarding significant progress in Line 3's yields (& the likely application of this improvement to Line 2 and subsequent lines) combined with the important near term factors Mooter cites in item #4, prompts me to restate my earlier question: How will institutions accumulate a meaningful position in VLNC without driving the price up? I would give at least a few of them credit for doing their research on this company's prospects. The time frame is short. Small float. Thin volume. Time is running out on the big players. Well - just hypothetically mind you - they could start by trying to take advantage of margin calls and stop loss orders. Under such conditions, the Form 144 filing, the Korean economy, whatever, would be pure gifts. I look forward to the day - IMO sooner rather than later - when they can't hold this one down any longer. (PS: VLNC is also a part of the S&P SmallCap 600. I tried to get an updated report today, but was unsuccessful. Will do so asap and report any significant changes here. I do expect the new report to reflect the news of litigation dismissal.)

To: mooter775 who wrote (1465)	12/1/1997 9:17:00 AM
From: Jeff S.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Mooter: >>My understanding of the current situation is as follows: (1) Company has received many calls from irate investors regarding CR's 144 sales, which I am led to believe were concluded early last week. Company maintains these were entirely for personal reasons and fulfilled earlier commitments to create a modest amount of liquidity once the lawsuit was settled. I am led to believe the 50 k shares represented all that will be sold for some time.>> This is the first indication I have read that CR has actually sold the stock that form 144 was filed for. So to clear up any mis-understanding I may have, did CR actually sell the 50K shares that form 144 was filed for. Thank you. Jeff