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 (3407)	7/17/1998 5:07:00 PM
From: mooter775	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

I don't care one way or other whether or not Red Chip Review is publishing on Valence or ceased to publish with a sell in conjunctin with or after the analyst covering Valence left. When the notice regarding cessation of coverage was published, to my recollection the stock didn't do much of anything. Viable financing, start of production and contracts - as John Curtis and others have been saying for weeks - will determine the viability of this investment. If they can do these, they'll have more coverage than they need. If they dont, no amount of coverage will amount to squat.

To: FMK who wrote (3407)	7/17/1998 5:15:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Persistence in the absence of guile, that you are Fred. The practice of "pull(ing) an article about a company prior to release if they become aware that its existence has been leaked and there is an unequal dissemination of information" is one that the editors of financial magazines share in unawares with me. "unequal dissemination of information" What information? Inside information? Public information? If it were inside information that Red Chip received from an insider, any release at any time would be violating the confidence of their insider source and they would not publish. In that case, there would be no report. If it were inside information that Red Chip discovered in the course of their business, the info would, by discovery, become public and be publishable. Your fictional report would be released. If the info (in your fictional "pulled" report) were public, then there would be no prohibition against publishing. In the last case, the advance "leaks" you spuriously cite would be called advertisements Fred. They generate interest and sell copies. They are encouraged by Red Chip. Red Chip would suffer no constraints to releasing your fictional report and happily would do so. In none of the cases would there ever be a scenario in which they might have published but for leaks and SEC penalty. Once more Fred. There is no report.