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: webpilot who wrote (1577)	12/6/1997 8:03:00 PM
From: Javelyn Bjoli	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Wow, 20% short, that is huge. Where are you looking that up? I was wondering if the shorties sold ULBI at the bottom of the recent dip - the large short interest has been going on for months. Is it getting bigger or smaller? I don't know what the effect will be. Perhaps they are awaiting a return to 9-10 range between now & production? They seem to be betting that revenues from the old product line will continue to decline, ie the bottom line will stay in the red, for quite some time before the rechargeables will hit production. They would only need a 6-month slip in production schedules to justify a large price drop. I don't think that is so unreasonable to expect, although I wouldn't put my own money on it. I would think if ULBI ships on time (Mitsubishi notebook is already shipping in Japan, anyone seen a Web mailorder place advertising it?), it would force a short squeeze price lift. Or would it hold the price down as the short interest burns off? I don't have a good grasp of the technicals in such a situation - can some of the technical traders comment?

To: webpilot who wrote (1577)	12/8/1997 5:55:00 AM
From: Javelyn Bjoli	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

I don't recall seeing any commentary so far on the 11/26/97 "Batteries" issue of CTSL (Calif. Tech Stock Letter, of Michael Murphy fame) so far. 2.5 pages of basic explanation of batteries, leading diffusely to a point that engine starting is a $12B market, while the electronics & medical (notebooks & cellular) is only $1.6B. He does not make a specific recommendation, but does say he is watching BOLD for a buy opportunity. LITH is barely mentioned, ULBI is only noted for non-rechargeables, but at least VLNC got a mention of polymer for notebooks/phones and the Delco work on starter batteries. In the tone of the article, which spends most of its time on lead acid & vehicles, it's a relative win. CTSL sponsors the land speed record holding electric car, which runs on (guess what) lead acid. So while I am excited beyond description that VLNC (et al) has finally bubbled up to written mention in one of the leading tech-stock newsletters, I can't exactly report a glowing buy recommendation. Murphy's picks have been pretty sour this year, maybe it's just as well.