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 : INVX Innovex Comdex Winner !! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Oliver who wrote (2370)	4/8/1998 9:55:00 PM
From: Kurthend	Respond to of 3029

Mark and Doug Fant, I got bored tonight and looked at the 5 year stock chart on INVX. I am not "into" TA but what I found was interesting. The figures / dates are not exact but only approximations: Mid 1993 - Mid 1994: The price of the stock was basically flat. Mid 1994 - Late summer 1995: The stock was up approximately 250%. Late summer 1995 - late summer 1996: Down approximately 50%. Early fall 1996 - May 1997: After stock split, gain of $6 to $42. May 1997 - Present: High of $42 to the present price in the mid $20s. It seems as though the price runs in cycles averaging around one year. If this holds true for the future then we may be closing in on the down cycle. I am trying to figure out the causes of the cycles in the stock price. Everyone knows why the sharp increase in price from early fall 1996 until May 1997 (conversion from TFI to MR/WAT and overproduction of disk drives) and the current downtrend (Over supply in disk drives). Do you all know why the price increased after mid 1994? Maybe it takes about a year for INVX to bring new technology into the market? Could HIF and interconnects for flip chips be the next boom in revenues/stock price for INVX over the next 1 - 1.5 years? I know the disk drive industry is "sucking" at this time and this could throw the history of INVX out the window in terms of trying to see a pattern to these cycles and determining the future. Anyway, if you have any thoughts let me know. Kurt PS I wholeheartedly agree with your message about NSM's system on a chip. The circuit board makers, assemblies, Cypress and others will not do well if the single chip technology turns into reality in 1999. I wonder what INTC will do and if this will also affect MU (is it possible to place any substantial memory on a chip?)?.

To: Mark Oliver who wrote (2370)	4/15/1998 1:25:00 PM
From: Kurthend	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3029

Mark, I know this is old news about HTCH's $140m offering but certains things seem to stick out like a sore thumb. I did not copy the whole message. 1. THE CONTINUED INEFFICIENCIES IN PRODUCING ITS TSA - doesn't sound to good to me. 2. HTCH believes that through this debt offering and cash flows this should be sufficient to last through FY 1999. This also doesn't sound to good for the short or mid term if they are stretching themselves this thin. 3. They do comment on the continued demand for TSA, but if the demand is so great, why are they doing so lousy? Kurt biz.yahoo.com >>.........HTCH noted that its operating results have been adversely affected by excess inventory held by disk drive and recording head manufacturers and continued inefficiencies in producing its TSA suspensions. Due to the combination of these factors, HTCH said its operating results have not provided the cash needed to help fund planned capital expenditures necessary to meet rising demand for the company's TSA suspension assemblies. HTCH added that it recently signed a commitment for a proposed $25,000,000 credit facility, subject to completion of the underlying documentation and certain other conditions. The company said it believes net proceeds from the offering plus anticipated future revenue and cash flow from operations will be sufficient to meet operating expenses, debt service, and capital expenditure requirements through fiscal 1999 but that there can be no assurances in this regard. HTCH noted, however, that continued significant capital expenditures will be necessary in fiscal 1999 and 2000 for continued expansion of its TSA suspension production capacity as the company transitions from conventional suspension assembly production to high volume TSA suspension assembly production, and to accommodate anticipated market growth.>>