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 : Ballard Power -world leader zero-emission PEM fuel cells -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marketbrief.com who wrote (2825)	6/25/1998 8:43:00 PM
From: David Kitt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5827

Inv Reporter says rapid rise is reason for caution Ballard Power Systems Inc BLD Shares issued 23,083,665 Jun 25 close $47.65 Thu 25 Jun 98 In the News In the June 26 issue, The Investment Reporter notes that Ballard's shares ($39.10) have tripled since last mentioned in the June 6, 1997 issue. Since then Ballard has entered into a partnership with Daimler-Benz and Ford Motor Co. Daimler has a 20 per cent interest in Ballard, while Ford's stake is 15 per cent. Yet, says the Reporter, Ballard is still years away from commercially producing its fuel cells and it should remain unprofitable for a few years. While Ballard is at the leading edge of fuel development and its partnerships with Daimler and Ford are promising developments, the Reporter says there are risks to consider. The costs to make fuel cells are high, the industry is increasingly competitive and the success of fuel cell technology should be dependent on environmental legislation. Meantime, the rapid rise of Ballard's share price is reason for caution. The Reporter says hold - and if your portfolio is heavily weighted with Ballard stock - reduce your holdings. (c) Copyright 1998 Canjex Publishing Ltd. canada-stockwatch.com

To: marketbrief.com who wrote (2825)	6/25/1998 10:05:00 PM
From: Stephen O	Respond to of 5827

It is not only you who thinks the chart is lousy, My post #2696 on Jun 4th said the technical action is lousy and the stock is going down. Well it did. I agree with you the believers are there until the bitter end.

To: marketbrief.com who wrote (2825)	6/25/1998 10:24:00 PM
From: Sid Turtlman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5827

marketbrief.com: I am the last person that anyone would call a believer in Ballard, but I don't think the resignation of the CFO, given the circumstances, has any negative significance. The only time a CFO quitting is trouble is when a company has questionable or controversial accounting, or the company needs to raise cash and the CFO was held in high respect. In this case, Ballard doesn't go even slightly out of the way to make the numbers look better than they are; they don't have to, because they know that investors don't care about current numbers. And Ballard has plenty of cash to last it a long while. The most likely explanation is that the CFO is now very wealthy because of the stock, and would like to do something else in life. I'm not saying that the stock can't go down, and maybe the chart is bad (I can't tell), but the CFO leaving is, IMO, nothing to worry about.

To: marketbrief.com who wrote (2825)	6/25/1998 11:54:00 PM
From: Thomas Stewart	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 5827

Thanks for your contribution; shameless promotion though it is, I did out of curiosity check out your site! IMHO TA is what has been missing from an otherwise outstanding thread. I accept the general proposition that market timing can be aided with TA, and have even read a little about it. But I am a neophyte. Maybe you can assist me. You point out some bearish patterns. Isn't it also true that there has recently (yesterday) been a possible MACD breakout to the upside? Isn't this bullish? (I think this is what caused Rbarsom to buy the stock as he indicated earlier.) This gets out what has most frustrated me about TA, namely that two people can look at the same thing and come to entirely different conclusions. As I re-read my post, I realize that it sounds like a request for a justification for TA. That is a tall order-no doubt well beyond the scope of a casual reply! Maybe you can just explain why the MACD is to be ignored in this case.