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 (7258)	1/20/1999 10:16:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Respond to of 27311

<<When I was first involved, it was tough to get them to even admit they were in the battery business.>> Not according to your posts on this thread FMK. According to your inside sources, VLNC has been within a matter of weeks of production for 2 years now. If you can find just one of your posts in the last 2 years that admits they are more than a few weeks away from production and contracts, please point that post out to me. On the other hand, I can find dozens of your posts over the last two years saying your sources were telling you production was imminent. One of these times you might be right. After all, if VLNC does ever sign a contract, you will certainly be able to point to your most recent prediction of production within a few weeks and claim you were right. All that would prove to me is that saying about the stopped clock is quite applicable to your record on this thread. So far, your record lags behind a stopped clock.

To: FMK who wrote (7258)	1/20/1999 10:18:00 PM
From: jean1057	Respond to of 27311

you are right Fred...this "scam" lets Milken look like a choir boy...

To: FMK who wrote (7258)	1/20/1999 10:19:00 PM
From: Tmoore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

God Fred -- I must be nuts too! I took apart one of dem dare hard drives the other day and it looked like a dam tinker toy. Anyone could have invented that. I think AS might be a con artist. I'll check in to it. Tmoore

To: FMK who wrote (7258)	1/20/1999 10:53:00 PM
From: john t. brice	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

FMK> I think you are on to something, Carl and Al must be having a high old time laughing at you and I spending our hard earned money on this stock after all it only cost them a few million to sucker us in. Darkside did bring up a point I've thought about lately though. Quite possibly one of the reasons that VLNC has been so quiet is that if nothing is announced until after a material event is that it will substantially up the ante for a buy out. Maybe it is in the stockholders best interest to remain silent. duckster

To: FMK who wrote (7258)	1/21/1999 12:09:00 AM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

No, not at all true. Of course you wouldn't get it or show that you get it. The company is working to produce a battery, The directors enjoy a challenge. The exercise just might pay off in a viable company. One of many that produces batteries in a large market. The profile of such a company is repeated across many sectors. The problem for all that have sunk large amounts waiting for their pay day is that for such companies the pay day is not large. It struggles to compete. It does not extract large economic rents. If its product is technically good enough it might be acquired by a larger company. Then again, despite the management's and board's best efforts they might not make it. fmk's rather forced, laughably sarcastic spin is to exaggerate to ridiculous proportions the positions counter to his. The problems with the company in no way means its efforts are not in good faith. Many a company operating in good faith with a much better record of execution and much more secure financial reserves opposing much less formidable competition fail.