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: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/10/1999 10:44:00 PM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

The information you post is helpful. Do you know the names of the four establishing new positions and the two who cashed out? You implied that Vanguard increased its position "significantly" during the latest reporting period. Can you quantify that statement? Note that 8.18% institutional ownership is very small and is a decline from the 8.72% you reported in May 1998. The 8.72%, in turn, represented a decline from 9.71%, as you reported, for the period prior to March 1998.

To: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/10/1999 11:36:00 PM
From: Pallisard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Jacques - The next post is an inquiry from Visnic. He would like to engage you in a discussion of the minutia. Like all neurotics, his aim is to re-interpret reality until it fits his conclusion. (Unlike psychotics who deny reality) By stacking minutia into a morass of trivial detail, he can wear down his opponent to a point of such confusion that the opponent merely concedes from boredom or fatigue. If the opponent doesn't concede and actually succeeds in making his case or stubbornly and vocally refuses to accept Visnic's view, he will become anxious and aggressive(insulting) because that would contradict his view of reality. (and himself - an unacceptable rejection). His only other option is to escape (vacate the offending environment), which he did earlier this year, but now has returned to reinstate his ego (in his own mind). He will NEVER give you the satisfaction of admitting you were right and he was wrong. I only say all this because I've not seen your name before and want you to know the chore that lies ahead. Good luck

To: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/10/1999 11:39:00 PM
From: lws	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Many thanks, Jacques. They all seem to be on the buy side. lws

To: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/11/1999 12:48:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

Jaques, thanks, interesting info. I had never heard of Dimensional Fund Advisors, who has by far the largest stake at 900,000 shares, about 3X the next highest. So I looked around a little. It seems that Dimensional is a bunch of academic types who are trying to play fund manager. dfafunds.com Anyway, I assume VLNC is held in one of Dimensional's two U.S. Small Cap. funds. The following data is from the Wall Street Journal's January 7, 1999 Quarterly Mutual Fund Review. Dimensional has two U.S. Small Cap. funds. The 1998 return on investment for these funds was negative 7.3% and negative 5.5% respectively. The average return in 1998 for all diversified U.S. stock funds during 1998 was 14.52%, so these funds underperformed the average fund by more than 20%. However, this comparison is unfair since the average Small Cap. fund did not earn 14.52%. In fact, the average Small Cap. fund lost 0.22% in 1998, so the two Dimensional Small Cap. funds underperformance relative to the average Small Cap. fund was only 5% to 7%. Not quite so bad. The Wall Street Journal rates both Dimensional Small Cap. funds as D for one-year return, D for 3-year return, and C for 5-year return. The "D" rankings mean these funds have performed worse than 60% to 80% of all Small Cap. funds. What does this have to do with VLNC's prospects? Nothing. But it is interesting that the one institution which has taken a fairly sizeable stake in VLNC does not seem to have a particularly good track record in picking the Small Cap. winners.

To: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/11/1999 12:44:00 PM
From: add	Respond to of 27311

Dimensioanl Fund Advisors is a fund that deals in small-micro cap stocks. They are often "market-makers" in the stock in that they will buy and sell very illiquid stock, hence having "negative" transaction costs on their trades. On its board are some very sharp people including a Nobel-Prize winning economists Merton Scholes and Myron Miller and .... my boss ! Glad to see that they have a big stake in VLNC.

To: Jacques Tenzel who wrote (6962)	1/11/1999 8:21:00 PM
From: Jacques Tenzel	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 27311

I just communicated with a friend, whom I know well for over 20 years and totally believe to be telling the truth, who told me that he spent 20 minutes talking on the phone to Lev today about investor concerns. This individual has himself a large position in VLNC and also represents many others with large positions in the company. Although I have no direct personal knowledge, this information was valuable to me and therefor I throw it into the discussion for all to ponder. While it is just "Hearsay" and I do not usually post this type of communication I toss it out for all to evaluate for themselves. Lev's main message was that he & the company had far too much legal trouble already and he does not have any time to deal with lawsuits. He can and will make forward looking statements - he pretty much has full legal protection because he is describing events which MIGHT happen. But he will not make any complete status statements because if e.g. he ships batteries to customers and they find problems with them, the fact that he stated he shipped batteries will be used against him. His lawyers are advising him to be very, very cautious and he is taking their advice very, very seriously. He was obviously very burned by the lawsuit VLNC spent $6M defending. He explained that the above reasoning is why he could tell us in advance that line 1 was expected to be operational by end-of-September, but never followed up with any report of reaching that goal. He said he will not pre-announce any kind of PO, because then he will be hounded by 'when will the revenue stream begin'. He intends to let revenue speak for itself. He said that any P.O.'s will be followed very quickly by shipping the product and booking the revenue. He implied that we need to read the financial statements and let them speak for themselves. i.e. revenues coming in and before that build up of inventory would show up as an increased burn rate. There will not be any early announcement of P.O.'s in advance of customers actually receiving the product (when they are ready to start shipping their own product). He said customers like the product, and that they have 'programs' with various customers. The customer will be relying on the resellers to do the full range of testing. The resellers have their own full reputation at stake in putting their name on the product which they receive from VLNC & or sell to their customers. As per the above, those programs will not become public until shortly before the customers start taking delivery of the batteries. VLNC will be providing product to resellers (the packagers) who will sell to customer, so the process is indirect. He said everything he has said or will say will end up getting twisted (especially with 20-20 hindsight if anything goes wrong). Says he really bit his tongue after his remarks about break even on a cash basis - and that statement was immediately twisted into 'make a profit'..... Said he doesn't have time but does read the internet sometimes. Asked whether we would see Revenues before the end of the year...He predicted that would very definitely be the case. He said his inability to give positive status just has to be priced into the stock. He doesn't like the near term price swings, but that's just something investors have to live with. If you are trying to time the stock, he doesn't care. He says you should be in only if you are an investor and willing to wait. Concerning the CFO, he confirmed the rumour that he had had what he thought was a firm employment agreement with a candidate who then backed out at the very last moment. He thinks he's found the right guy now, but will not know for sure until he is actually aboard. Happy Investing....... Jacques