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: P. Ramamoorthy who wrote (7648)	1/28/1999 12:29:00 PM
From: Pallisard	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 27311

Ram - The orientals seemed to have had their inventive crest a few thousand years ago, having been displaced by Europeans. They're excellent innovators and gadgeteers, especially the Japanese, once they've stolen the technology, but original breakthroughs? They seem to have gone stale in the context of main stream world societies on original thought, almost as if they need an infusion of new DNA. Perhaps millenia of inbreeding causes that. During the year I spent in Japan, I noted that they seemed to be able to COPY anything, but getting the original idea seemed to escape them. Of course these are my own subjective conclusions, but you apparently agree.

To: P. Ramamoorthy who wrote (7648)	1/28/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: Pronichev	Respond to of 27311

Ram: Coca Cola of the battery world? Why not? Where are Sony's and Matsushita's patents? Their specs look poor. Are they the two Japanese Bellcore liscencees? Toshiba? Its never been public. If not, then their technolgies are non Bellcore, like Moltech and LITH; neither work. Have they advanced so far in non Bellcore technology? I doubt it. And if they ARE the two licencees, where are their patents to build on the Bellcore platform. What's up at Ericsson? 3.0 volt platform. Whats up at Saft, probably nothing much (but I think they are the closest to Sweden) hum dee dum hum dee dum Herb Blair is right Shhhhhhhhhhh I'm going shopping.

To: P. Ramamoorthy who wrote (7648)	1/28/1999 8:48:00 PM
From: John Curtis	Respond to of 27311

Ram: Can VLNC become another Coca-Cola? Jeez, don't we wish. However, regarding the Sony's, et.al's, of the world...well....potential patent infringement has never stopped them in the past in other market sectors, eh? So me think it won't stop them in this case, either. I'll bet you know the drill...infringe on the patents and make a BOATLOAD of cashiesh before you're caught and pulled into a long drawn-out patent fight. If you(as the infringer) lose said long(months/years?) fight well.....you will have made so much money you can throw the infringie a "bone" of some minor portion of yer profits, and if you've the deeeeep pockets you can keep uping the legal ante for years(after all, it's a jungle out there in the business world). Meanwhile you gain all the benefits of selling the technology and none of the pain of the research costs. Am I paranoid? Probably. I just hope VLNC has a strong legal group on retainer 'cause IF they succeed as we hope, I got to think that they'll be fighting an infringement war sooner than later. But then again, the big boy's are gonna want to sell their batteries here in the U.S. of A. so perhaps I'm just whistling in the dark since they'll have to acquiesce to our system. Truly it may be simpler to pay a royalty and be done with it. However, right now all of this is in the future. I'm still waiting for some p.o.'s!! John~

To: P. Ramamoorthy who wrote (7648)	1/28/1999 9:38:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 27311

<<ULBI's management change is indicative of the intense competition, challenges in commercial production, and cash starvation...VLNC has 133Million in losses and was cash starved until recently>> Mr. Ramamoorthy, compared to VLNC, ULBI is a cash cow. ULBI had working capital of approximately $38 million as of the end of the 3rd quarter. VLNC had working capital of negative $2.5 million. ULBI's cash burn rate is about $1 million per quarter, VLNC's is about $6 million per quarter. VLNC received $7.5 million in additional funding at the end of the 4th quarter. However, given that they probably burned $6 million during the 4th quarter, VLNC probably began 1999 with working capital of about negative $1 million (-$2.5 million -$6 million + $7.5 million). Whereas ULBI probably began 1999 with positive working capital of about $37 million. So your suggestion that ULBI is cash-starved while VLNC is not is incorrect. While neither company has the capital resources to compete with the Japanese, at least ULBI does not have to try to juggle its creditors while trying to avoid a floorless conversion of convertible shares.