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: kolo55 who wrote (7561)	1/26/1999 12:30:00 PM
From: MGV	Respond to of 27311

Fair enough Paul. I have seen your posts on the ECM threads here. They are thoughtful and add value. It is a very good sector. I thought your criticism of CKFR pick last August was less than objective. You must admit you had an agenda in stating it. Moreover, the mention of competition from MSFT/FDC/C JV, now named Transpoint, confirmed to me then that you had not spent much time on the company. As is patently clear now, the putative MSFT competition was mostly perception. The reason for the downward revision last August was a function of Bank focus and not market share or pricing erosion. The CKFR story was and continues to be very different from the VLNC story. I hope you invested in CKFR in October. Congratulations on your other picks. I have to admit that I tend to paint all of the bullish posters on this thread with a broad brush. I'll try not to be surprised when I find a sensible post here.

To: kolo55 who wrote (7561)	1/26/1999 12:44:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

As a veritable assembly of companies come forth with reasonably specific releases on their capacity to come to market with lith poly product, has it occurred to anyone that the VLNC policy of silence is counterproductive, if not outrageous? One point on which all of the readers of the Barron's article can agree is that VLNC faces high skepticism in the market as well as investment community. One can argue whether the previous events in VLNC's history justify the skepticism or not. One cannot argue that the skepticism is a reality. It is hurting VLNC in both the equity and debt markets at a time when VLNC is anything but cash rich. The stated reason for the policy does not hold water. Fear of litigation. The policy goes beyond conservative. As more competitors announce with verifiable statements, the flag on VLNC is raised higher and becomes deeper red in color. The policy by itself might not be dispositive. When it is bundled with other disturbing facts, such as the continuing absence of a CFO and the apparent utter rejection by any analysts to endorse VLNC's alleged progress, it becomes very suggestive.