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 (4870)	11/11/1998 7:25:00 PM
From: FMK	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

Further thoughts on line 1. Oversimplified Engineer's logic. If 1800 per day(x 90 = 162,000 per quarter) breaks the company even then this number could be equated with the cash burn rate Lev mentioned. Dividing the burn rate per quarter by 162,000 should equal the profit per battery.

To: FMK who wrote (4870)	11/11/1998 8:20:00 PM
From: Greg Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

FMK, the sole focus of my observation/concern is that 1800 cells per day at $2.50/Wh do NOT add up to breaking even. The math does not support that claim/assumption. Hopefully, however, Lev meant batteries, not cells. Hopefully, the line can crank out a LOT more than the minimum breakeven number. (I think it will HAVE to in order to achieve profitability.) Do we have any public comments from management on the actual volume expected? Or do we just have official statements on the breakeven point? P.S. IMO, 8 hours production per day to start would be solid. 16 hours/day would be fantastic, but optimistic. But 23 hours per day? Come on, FMK, that's unrealistic for any production line, much less a start-up line for a new technology.