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 (6277)	12/25/1998 1:59:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Fred, an S-3 that does not contain up to date information, is a travesty and endangers the company (exposes to litigation) much more then a lose "forward looking" statement. Who, the H**l is running this ship. Having the wrong executives on the roster? There are hundred of new investors that do not know the history of the company and they rely on S-3 and other SEC documents exclusively for their investment decision making process. The decline might have been more due to the shody job of issuing such an outdated S-3 then the perceived delay in the material order. Investors that have known the company for some time, and thus knew of the misleading information in that S-3 might have been the one asking themselves, if an S-3 can be filed with so many errors, how can they do the right job on the plant's floor. How can you be apologetic about such shortfalls? Well, Merry Christmas and happy new year to all, and hope that market participants will have a short memory once better news come to the fore. Zeev

To: FMK who wrote (6277)	12/25/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: I. N. Vester	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Still a vlnc bull but Lev really screwed me this time. I have written a polite but angry letter to him about this. I'm not sure whether it does any good to write, but I urge anybody else to do so. If you have a significant position, tell him that - it may improve his ability to hear what you are saying. Assuming the S3 was simply poorly worded and misleading, I blame Lev for that even if he did not write it or proofread it himself. He is responsible and since he refused to give us any kind of specific details on several key status areas in the last cc, he created the vacuum of information which allowed the S3 to be taken as an announcement of 3-6 month delay before any P.O. can be expected. The key point is that IF HE HAD NOT BEEN SO GODDAMN SECRETIVE at the last CC, and had answered the questions like "have samples been shipped off line 1 to OEMs?" and "What level of confidence do you have about getting P.O.'s before the 1/27 milestone date of the CC financing deal"? with anything more informative than "no comment", then there would have been a much stronger counter balance to the misleading S3. I believe in Lev's leadership and ability to make this company succeed. But he's done an abysmal job of communicating to us and that led very directly to this sell-off. This incident is very strong proof that his communication style is totally unacceptable. I think he needs to hear this very loudly and clearly. The fact is that we have only extremely wishy-washy proof even now that the S3 words do not refer to line 1 and no public statement to the contrary. This is completely unacceptable. Doubt still remains and if Lev has even the slightest clue of his responsibility to clear this up he will issue a press release. Unfortunately I have no faith in his ability to figure this out for himself. I urge everyone else on this list to spend the time composing a polite but strongly worded letter and the $10 to mail to Lev via overnight mail. Maybe, just maybe, he'll begin to understand how far up his rear end his head has been by communicating so poorly. Lev is a former truck-lift driver. He has made his way up to Valence CEO, but still needs to take 'Corporate Communications 101'. Don't know if I could do better, but he really screwed us and will continue to do so. Even if the company is very successful and the stock does well, it will continue to cost us if he does not improve the way he talks about it.