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: Rich Wolf who wrote (7375)	1/23/1999 12:38:00 PM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

First, Dawson's reluctance to represent development status in light of previous experience is highly suggestive of a problem. The risk of announcing a contract and not delivering is the basis for the fear. It follows that as the risk of "not delivering" abates so will the fear of announcing. Taking that logic with consistent statements from Motorola, Gateway and other persons with interests in the technology, it is not surprising that the risk of not delivering remains so high to justify VLNC's silence. Taking all of the evidence together, its reasonable to conclude the fear won't dissipate for at least several quarters more. In the meantime, the big guns in the industry are moving ahead. Second, there is no evidence to conclude the author is unfair to VLNC. The issue is not whether the author is "negative on VLNC" but, rather whether he is unfairly so. Based on significant statements from industry observers and VLNC's silence taken in the context of that silence there is ample evidence to support a dismal view of VLNC's prospects for being first, biggest, and/or best. You write: "Mr. Scholl ought to have applied more weight to Lev's statement." Maybe it is you that must apply more weight and thought to Dawson's position.