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: kolo55 who wrote (3887)	8/22/1998 2:39:00 PM
From: DKR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

For clarification, when the stock was above $5, at least in my situation it required 70% equity. I noticed one of my posts listed in your prior comments as being deceptive, I am assuming that this was an error for I was merely reporting my situation and projecting a possible scenario.

To: kolo55 who wrote (3887)	8/22/1998 3:48:00 PM
From: FMK	Respond to of 27311

Paul, I agree with your analysis and have some comments on margin percentages. I understand that according to federal guidelines, stock becomes unmarginable below $3. Individual firms, however, can set their requirements higher. I am aware of several that keep the stock marginable down to $3. If you purchase it below $5, however, it is not marginable until it closes above $5 or was purchased above $5. For Merril Lynch and Smith Barney I understand this is $4. For Schwab it was $5 and $3 except for last fall when they began requiring $3.5 per share equity for any stock below $10. This became a 70% requirement for a $5 stock and an 87.5% requirement for a $4 stock. Schwab's new rule caught me off guard last year and forced me to sell stock in the mid 4's that I had been accumulating in the 8's and 9's ready for the teens before the Sony deal fell through and Cal resigned. I therefore agree that recent market weakness helped set the stage for forcing sales of margined positions. Many shareholders had no choice but to liquidate when it makes more sense to be buying at the low prices. Market makers and institutions simply lower their bid prices because they know the margin sales are coming. As I was writing this, I spoke with a broker who believes we are near the end of margin selling and has been accumulating for himself as well as for clients. If this is indeed the scenario, the price is at artificially low levels and will not remain here for long. I see it as a golden opportunity for any investor, not just the institutions, to acquire stock while temporarily at these low levels. All who reported speaking with the company heard that everything is going well, and in some cases, going better than expected. Keep up the good work! Best Regards from FMK

To: kolo55 who wrote (3887)	8/22/1998 4:36:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Paul, I have to conclude from your taking this to a personal level that you have heavy emotions in this matter, emotions that are clouding judgement. My posts or DKR's post is neither the product of being uninformed nor dishonest. Let me suggest that it is a combination of common sense, plain vanilla fundamental analysis, and logic. Let me also suggest that you are walking a line in calling people liars in which you should exercise extreme caution. A breach of that line wpuld put one at risk of having legal losses to exacerbate what apparently have been deep market losses. Mark

To: kolo55 who wrote (3887)	8/23/1998 1:07:00 AM
From: Javelyn Bjoli	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

Just wondering, why are you guys looking at the December 5 calls at 13/16 when you could have March 5 calls for 15/16? I disagree that the company's fate is "sealed" by December. They have many checkpoints between here & success, with a long history of schedule slippage. Some milestones coming up: 0) Get some more money (done). 1) Analyst tour of NI plant (theoretically September). 2) Start production in NI (purported - September). 3) Product announcement by first customer (probably at Comdex in November if the batteries are ready in time). 4) Announce first shipment of batteries to customer (guess - December). 5) Customer actually starts delivery of notebook product with VLNC batteries (guess - January). 6) Announce more customers for notebook product (guess - Feb or March). 7) First 10Q with actual revenues from battery sales (reported in April). 8) Start production of cell phone batteries (first half of 1999). This is all if they don't slip or have more big problems. At the very least, the March calls get you through the January 10Q report. Some of you probably believe they will have revenues from real sales in that quarter?

To: kolo55 who wrote (3887)	8/26/1998 11:35:00 AM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

Ludicrous supposition crashes and burns klemencic wrote: If the scenario is correct, the short sellers and manipulators should close their positions just above 3.50. If the stock remained at that price for any length of time, all the margined shares would be converted to cash shares, and there is no margin forced selling to drive the price any lower. The market makers would seek to rebuild inventories of Valence at that price. As for timing, the risk (what risk???) of an impending announcement from Valence increases each day. The short term traders would want to neutralize their positions and avoid this risk. So if this scenario is correct, the players of this game, would want to close their positions fairly quickly, while price is below 4. As the stock prices continues to head down to 3 1/4ish as I write, you may need to reconsider the faulty theory offered by klemencic and adjust your strategy accordingly. Here is what I wrote: "The point remains that VLNC previously has fallen to well below the levels your margin conspiracy theory suggests as a lower limit and it could do it again." I was wrong, I should have said "will do it again." 3 1/4