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: golden_tee who wrote (3728)	8/13/1998 11:11:00 PM
From: one putt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Geeze!!! I've just read through the last 50 posts, and I thought I was on the Yahoo thread!! The only thing that tipped me off was the lack of ALL CAPITAL LETTER POSTS by ME***HURTS.... Let's all knock off the bashing and get back to discussing more meaningful issues! A plea for sanity!! Craig~

To: golden_tee who wrote (3728)	8/14/1998 2:45:00 AM
From: John Curtis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Robert: Having just waded(ultimately clicking past) the last "few" posts it's clear, based on the near instant reaction to posts over the better part of half a day that Mr. Visnic is performing a duty instilled by those things which motivate him, HEH! Hired gun comes to mind. And he speaks so intently of the long's suspicious manipulative tendencies while overlooking a tendency all his own. Ah, well, in a democracy ya gotta be willing to tolerate all sides, eh? Now matter how much they pontificate, and have the appearance of being a hired gun on a mission. Unfortunately, since he's become so repetitious, I've been forced to do with him what I routinely do to certain posters on the Yahoo thread who, for reasons known only to themselves, have been trying to character assassinate me(I have no other way of defining it than this). What do I do? I use the mouse click. To ignore is the best answer available on these threads. But I digress. Here it is 2:16am est and I'm just getting back to the hotel after a long day of corporate meetings, discussions, etc.. Talk about yer basic pontification. So I haven't had a chance to look at VLNC all that closely(ie. today's buy/sell action), BUT, I have to say it don't look all that good. Here's what I think. Despite the glowing words from the last call, I've got the feeling the Streets view of VLNC is this; "Here we go, more yammering from VLNC. They say they're close, but there's no proof. They say, for the second or third time, that analysts visits are weeks away, but once again it's mere vague commentary. They say, they say, they say.... Meanwhile their loan has some negative aspects and the cash burn rate ain't letting up so we ain't biting no more until we see PROOF(but that's not to say we won't play her)......" A stiff attitude? Yup, probably, but one based on the reality of VLNC's past history. Where am I going with this? Basically I've got the feeling VLNC is in play to a certain extent right now, with the overall direction of the "play" being negative. What MAY be going on is a variation of the short gambit mentioned earlier(I wish I could get my hands on day to day short volume for this stock). OR, MM's MAY be pulling the bid lower in an attempt to flush shares for their inventory. Be that as it may, against either possibility I've protected meself using the usual mechanisms. The bottom line is the Street, and all the rest of us, need VLNC to put their product where their mouth is and start producing p.o.'s. The longer it takes them to do this the lower this stock may go. IF they're in play I wouldn't be surprised to see them break below $4....... So based on that hypothesis I placed a "for chuckles" buy order in at $3.75. Guess we'll see what happens next, eh? Meanwhile, ya just gotta tolerate the random negative element, since VLNC ain't exactly negating the arguments. So be it. Remember, selective ignoring as it applies to thread viewing is a practice worth learning. Don'tcha just luuuuuv speculating? John~