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: Javelyn Bjoli who wrote (1584)	12/7/1997 9:44:00 AM
From: John Curtis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Javelyn: When betting on a market sector which is "on the come," it's advisable to spread your risk around. To me it's not a question of which of the 3, VLNC/LITH/ULBI, to speculate in, experience dictates(for me) speculation in all 3(as well as a couple of others). The percentage allocated for each are strictly personal but right now, based on all available short term information(read here, 6 months) VLNC forms the core of my SPECULATIVE portfolio. I'd be violating one of my principle "investment" tenants to place any of the 3 in my true core group. Maybe a year from now that'll change, but for now let's keep them in the specualative category. As for your comment stating "reduced relevance of opinion based on announced speculative tactics being used here," hmmmmmmm...... I don't understand the angst being generated by such commentary as that one. Where's it coming from, if I may politely ask? Since the companies you keep referring to come as no surprise to me(and I'll assume it's the same for others doing d.d. on this market sector), I'm a wee bit surprised you're referring to these companies as if they've just been newly discovered. This is, after all, a thread about VLNC. By the way, there are other, besides the ones you've noted, equally intriguing candidates out there too. And you should examine some of the excellent research coming out of such diverse places as MIT, or Univ. Tex.. When you begin to combine plastic batteries with polymer based electronics and composite based materials......... but that's "chatter" for a different thread. Regards!! John~

To: Javelyn Bjoli who wrote (1584)	12/7/1997 11:07:00 AM
From: FMK	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

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!

To: Javelyn Bjoli who wrote (1584)	12/7/1997 1:42:00 PM
From: Tickertype	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

I have no argument with your strategy of placing your money on other companies for the Christmas seasonal rise, or for not investing in Valence - I would be the last to tell anyone where to put their money. I also think that John C. pretty well summed up my own views with respect to Valence and the VLNC board. Yes, there is a lot of traffic on this board. Why is that? My guess is that a lot of people feel that Valence is leading the charge in this little sector. From what I know about the three companies (V/U/L), I do believe that Valence has the greater potential for sustained earnings growth. With several lines, a strategy to add several more per year, JV's, and more JV's likely to follow, I see great potential there, in spite of any temporary spike-up in the beginning. At this point the other companies apparently have one and none, production lines that is. Could be they have something going we don't know about, since I see posters on the ULBI thread also complaining about that company's unwillingness to tell them anything when they call. I think one compared them to the CIA, if memory serves. Finally, I'd love to see some former insiders doing what you described about the IFMX thread, but I guess there aren't any out there. Maybe Cal will join in now? Well, I don't think we are like the posters on the FTEL thread, who do nothing but stroke each other all day, and instantly chase anyone away who dares even mention something that isn't favorable to the company. So, no, I don't need to hear only opinions that confirm my own, quite to the contrary if someone becomes aware of something that may be negative for Valence I want to be the first to know. However, I think people who want to discuss other companies, over several posts, should do it on those threads.