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: lws who wrote (6958)	1/10/1999 8:21:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

Do you have any answers to the questions raised in the last post to you and to pronichev? If you were to tell me that 1 or more funds with good to excellent track records have owned VLNC, I might modify my view. If Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, DLJ, JPM, Montgomery, H&Q, Robbie Stephens or a comparable firm were to initiate coverage of VLNC, even if it were with no more than a "hold," it might cause a review of opinion. All of these firms are in the business of raising debt and equity capital, why didnt any of them, including some of the smaller, more reqional firms such as Piper Jaffray, work with VLNC to raise capital in the debt and/or equity markets. Why do you suppose VLNC ended up obtaining the money it did from Castle Creek with controversial terms? A civil discussion you are seeking? The personal attacks are ridiculous. Take an objective look at the personal attacks towards any one with a counter view to VLNC as a $100 stock. I'll take no part in them just as I won't be sensitive to personal vulnerabilities among you in expressing dissenting views. The questions raised above are reasonable ones. They are ones that I would seek to have answered if I had a position in VLNC, as you have acknowledged you do.