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: John Curtis who wrote (5914)	12/12/1998 11:21:00 AM
From: Dennis V.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Close, he's a detective. Nice going, from one Dennis to another.eom

To: John Curtis who wrote (5914)	12/12/1998 11:27:00 AM
From: Tiki Hawkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

All, Some very interesting posts in the last 24 hours. On the one hand we have Dennis's conversation with Lev relating the mood during the analyst visit. Very upbeat. We also have Robert's post relaying a conversation with IR indicating that 1/27 requirements should be met without a problem and the CFO/COO announcement will be well received. On the other we have a point from that same conversation with IR indicating OEMs have not received batteries from NI and won't until January. We also have a post reminding us of this nagging variable conversion issue hanging out there. My question to everyone, and this is not rhetorical, is 'How long do we wait?'. The upside potential is, IMHO, indisputable. Fred's numbers demonstrate the possibilities, regardless of how precise they are. It's obvious however that the investment community does not currently share his assessment of the chance of failure. Lev is upbeat, but you have to be an eternal optimist to run a startup and be able to go to work every morning. IR is the same group that said everything was on track for September (1997) production weeks before the CC were Cal indicated they would probably slip into 1998 (he forgot to mention he would be gone), so anything, positive at least, out of IR can't be taken too seriously. We have some serious inside money (Berg, Lev) who selfishly can't let this thing collapse, and yet as a start-up there primary concern is survival, not shareholder value. I could go on and on, but my point (and there is one) is that IMHO there will not be a contract on 1/7, when we are asked to approve the issuance of a potentially unlimited number of shares. That vote is the whole point of the shareholder's meeting, and it really can't not pass (double negative?). Assuming that to be true, and the only official news we get is the announcement of a new CFO/COO, how traumatic will that be to the share price as 1/27 approaches? How will each of you determine how long to hold? I would appreciate the views of all willing to share their thought process on this. Thanks in advance.

To: John Curtis who wrote (5914)	12/12/1998 4:34:00 PM
From: Dennis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

John & all: Some other little snippets popped out of the further reaches last night, & in answer to some of the questions this A.M., read on! 1) John, I asked my wife if I was correct about the name...she affirmed that it was Christy, Christa or something very close to that. Perhaps a pointed question to her which will verify the veracity of my post would be, "Is there any facility nearby which has something to do with pants?" or "Have you decorated the Christmas tree yet?". I'll post mid week with the answer. 2) We were there & I've been lurking on this board every day for as long as it's been around, posting only very occasionally. 3) I did own a detective agency for awhile as well as other relatively successful businesses but am retired now. 4) The only way we could characterize the visit & man was very positive & upbeat, almost cheerful! 5) There were other brand li-poly products sitting on his little visitor's desk as well as numerous VLNC batteries. 6) He did say that he was going to sell the building & move the company again...I questioned the expense of a start up like VLNC doing that but he stated the profit from the sale of the bldg would more then cover any moving costs. Also, as has been stated, he felt there were not enough technically advanced people & facilities in the area to do what is needed down the line. In sequence to this comment, he stated that there are several VLNC Phds here in Seattle now & that there were excellent university type facilities (& perhaps Microsoft millionaires) for what he feels needs to be done. 7) He didn't take us thru the facility for "security reason". 8) The parking lot held mostly newer cars with a fair smattering of SUVs & one or two beaters. 9) They were supposedly test producing batteries at the facility but at low speed as there were so many people that had gone to NI & it was my impression that this was being done to facilitate improvements. Like Porky says..."That's allll, folks!!", except to ask, isn't it remarkable how much money many of us have spent buying this company's stock & not having tried to visit the facility or speak with Lev one on one??? Incidentally, the stockholder's meeting will be held in the company cafeteria but the date is still not set in concrete (Christy said the Proxys will be going out this next week, supposedly!) And as the usual caveat, the previous post & the above are mostly my personal impressions except the two or three statements specifically in quotes. Luck to us all, Dennis