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: John Curtis who wrote (3252)	7/3/1998 2:24:00 PM
From: Tickertype	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Not that I want to keep beating this dead horse, but we are still seeing posts which maintain that those who say the endless negative caveats on the 10-K are there mainly for legal purposes, are dupes and idiots, etc. Is there anyone intelligent out there who thinks that any company, especially one that is seeking additional financing, would say all those things if they didn't feel there was a certain need to do it for legal reasons? Would someone who sends a resume to a prospective employer fill it with statements like "there can be no assurance that I will ever show up for work"....."and if I do, there can be no assurance that I know what I'm doing or that I'll do anything useful at all"....etc, etc. As a matter of fact, in earlier times before litigation became the name of the game, companies more often than not published glowing accounts of how well they were going to do, regardless how gloomy the real outlook was. Again, anyone who thinks Valence put all those caveats (except possibly the financial portion) in their 10-K because they actually believe that things are that bad, truly IS an idiot! - T -