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: DStandish who wrote (6436)	12/30/1998 12:17:00 AM
From: FMK	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

And should the improved financing package have driven the stock price down? I am reminded of the selloff before a prior conference call when disclaimers on a 10q were amplified with the effect of yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. Once again, attorneys disclaimers were available in the SEC filings that were required as part of the improved financing package. The improved financing package should have boosted shareholder confidence. Instead, a panic selloff again occurred, accentuated by margin worries and we are at 6 instead of 10. Its still tough to accept that the stock went down when conditions actually improved substantially. At least it seems many have figured it out for themselves. The near 300 employees are making batteries that meet or exceed customer specs. Castle Creek must have been convinced or they wouldn't have relaxed the terms. Lev must be convinced or he wouldn't have more equipment on order. As he recently told a shareholder during his lunch break "I wouldn't have ordered it in a million years if I thought there was a chance of failure".

To: DStandish who wrote (6436)	12/30/1998 6:28:00 AM
From: Herb Blair	Respond to of 27311

I agree with you guys. They smelled when they first appeared.<EOM>

To: DStandish who wrote (6436)	12/30/1998 12:20:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Respond to of 27311

D Standish, you accuse Zeev and myself to be some kind of professional stock manipulators. You mentioned our posts declined when the price was up, and increased when the price was down. I don't know about Zeev, but my last "flurry" of posts was immediately following the last conference call when I shared with the thread the "red flags" I saw. When the stock continued to move upward in spite of my "red flags", I simply assumed the market was telling me my red flags were incorrect, I congratulated the thread, and left you alone. When the floorless terms were removed from the first tranche I came back to the thread to express my opinion that this was good news. When the S-3 came out and confirmed (at least to me) one of the red flags (samples not being shipped) as of yet, I came back to talk about the situation. Through this discussion and HellQat's detective work, I think we have all gotten a little closer to where the hype ends and the truth begins. Is that not the purpose of these threads...to learn more about your investment? And to those who accuse me of trying to manipulate the stock to further my trading I say, first, doesn't it make sense to be in the stock and more positive about its prospects when certain events, such as insider buying, lead you to believe its prospects have improved? Second, doesn't it also make sense to be out of the stock and more negative about its prospects when certain events, such as red flags at conference calls, convince you that its propsects may not be as good? And if I were trying to manipulate the stock, why would I acknowledge good news (removal of the floorless) when I don't own the stock? With HellQat's detective work, I am now more cautiously optimistic than I was after having read the SEC filings. But I don't own the stock. Guess I shouldn't be saying that <VBG>.