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: FMK who wrote (3269)	7/4/1998 12:42:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

Right Fred, its ok to borrow money. Now listen carefully, its not ok to have more debts than assets.

To: FMK who wrote (3269)	7/10/1998 12:08:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

Random walks and Inefficiencies - HighLows and FMKs The market is distinguishable by duration. Stock price follows a random walk over the short term. Market timing seeks to predict short term movements in violation of the random walk. get in, get out, get in, get out. Over the long term price follows fundamentals, if cash flow grows, stock price surely will follow over the long term (and unfortunately for long-suffering VLNC cultists the reverse is savagely just as true). The market is not a random walk over the long term and that is why reputable, successful investors (not newsletter writers) can earn returns greater than market average returns .. on .. a .. consistent .. basis. market timing - random walk - short term all are crap shoots. Go find a boardwalk and gamble. On another point, its always dangerous to paint with a broad brush. John, as usual, overgeneralizes when he paints sales people with a broad brush. Just as there are good and bad shoe salesmen there are good and bad stock analysts. Market timers are inherently suspect for the reasons mentioned above. And its worth noting again that market timers depend on YOUR money to buy THEIR newsletters. They don't use their money to follow their own statements. Third, I took nothing out of context with DW. He made the generalized statement that financing (i.e. whether dilutive or not) would not be a problem. Then he said "well, no worse than 50-50." (paraphrase). He also said he couldnt know for sure about dilution because he was not privy to the financing information and that even if dilution were a factor, his professed belief in the imminent earnings in the company would more than make up for the dilution. Fourth, Fred, does full disclosure mean anything to you? You allege a fact, you don't play games and follow by saying "try to find it" This isnt a game for people who are losing money on VLNC. There are people reading your allegations, answer their questions, if you can and back it up, if you can. Don't play hide and seek with people's time.