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: Robert Cohen who wrote (1712)	12/12/1997 3:01:00 AM
From: Gordon Quickstad	Respond to of 27311

I checked this site for verification about Mr. Reed's filing to sell 50,000 shares. It shows his Form 144 being filed in November. The site says that the sales usually quickly follow the filing. The actual sale is accompanied by a Form 4 filing and that must be filed within 10 days of the end of the month in which the sale occurred. The site's latest week for actual sales is 12/5/97, so the next update should be dated 12/12/97. Perhaps we'll see what average price Mr. Reed got for his shares on the following site on their next update. insidertrader.com

To: Robert Cohen who wrote (1712)	12/12/1997 10:55:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker	Respond to of 27311

<<BTW if you truly had inside information would you share it with the world or keep it to yourself>> Robert: You seem to be awfully suspicious about those who claim to company insiders on this thread. Obviously, it is not a bad idea to take with a grain of salt what you read on the internet. But for the time I have followed this thread, I can find no evidence that those claiming to speak to company insiders are hyping the stock. Have they had access to "material" inside information which is not available to the general public? I would consider "material" inside information to be something like which OEM's they are negotiating with, the status of those negotiations, CR's departure, etc. I have seen nothing of the sort posted on this thread. The types of things that have been posted (e.g. commercialization program going well, 1st quarter production still expected) have been also disclosed via the conference call, and have also been confirmed by Red Chip's reports. I haven't seen anything on this thread which I consider to be insider information.

To: Robert Cohen who wrote (1712)	12/13/1997 4:04:00 AM
From: Tickertype	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

Robert, I believe Larry said it very well - there hasn't been any "insider information" posted on this thread that I've seen, either. When people call the company and talk to guys like Reed or Archibald, they get answers to their questions. But all I've seen has been very general in nature, no sensitive information such as on-going negotiations with specific customers, etc, as Larry pointed out. I don't understand the tendency by some on this thread to literally declare someone a liar, or accusing someone of having a "God complex", or whatever the hell he called it, based on no evidence but the accuser's personal beliefs. I look at a lot of other SI threads, where people routinely report having spoken with officials of the companies involved, but I don't see the character of those posters maligned. I'm fairly sure everyone here knows that they should apply their own filter to what they read in these posts, and as far as someone fabricating information in order to hype the stock I'm also fairly sure that any comments made by one or two posters will not move the stock price one bit. So what would they gain? I also don't buy the inference that people who wish to maintain anonymity are therefore not to be believed. Many, myself included, prefer this because we are discussing our personal financial affairs in a public forum. If we say we "heard from a friend" some tidbit of news, why would it make the news any more believable if we said the friend's name is Joe Blow, or whatever? It can still be just as much b.s. if he so chooses, name or no name. But I will say this much; the comments I passed on from some posters on AOL have since been corroborated privately to me by several individuals who have talked with senior management today, and WHOM I ABSOLUTELY TRUST, and if there are some here who choose to believe otherwise, well, I'll gladly defer to our friend Clark Gable - frankly my dear, I don't give a damn! - T -