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: Dennis V. who wrote (8535)	2/18/1999 8:59:00 PM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

You managed to be wrong twice in the same sentence! Take a long, hard look at your sources little guy.

To: Dennis V. who wrote (8535)	2/18/1999 9:33:00 PM
From: Mark Johnson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

David has just pegged Goliath right between the eyes bringing him to his knees. Todays news is the biggest event for Valence in many years, just a prelude to the plan for worldwide dominance in the Lithium Ion arena. Never has Valence tooted its horn in this way before in relation to its 300 plus patents. Many Japanese engineers were forced to fall on their swords today because Valence just lapped the opponents. This latest patent is serious hindrance to the competition mired in the cobalt grip. It's gonna be pretty hard to dance around this development. Bet gvander is sweating bullets!! Increased my position at the opening this AM. Wolanchuck will be proven correct!

To: Dennis V. who wrote (8535)	2/19/1999 2:04:00 PM
From: lws	Respond to of 27311

Once more around the press release: Hi, Dennis, Thanks for the tip. I checked out MKT's messages, and sent him the following reply. As you can see, I still think the importance of this doggone press release has been underappreciated. To MKT: I caught your discussion of the cathode patent this morning -- thanks for the help with the technology. I view Valence's patent portfolio as an ever-increasing field of land mines, as devices to raise costs and force delays, or as FUD factors, and I include the new patent in this view. Trying to identify a particular patent as a show-stopper is not only risky in practice, but is also risky in that it may obscure the larger competitive role that patents play. Nevertheless, I still think the press release announcing this patent with some commentary is more significant than just the announcement of the 217th patent in the Valence portfolio. The patent is part of the larger picture the press release paints. First, the Valence people must have thought the patent matter was significant enough to the company to be "material," and hence had to be announced. These people do not make announcements except about material events, and I think their threshold for a "positive" material event is quite high. Evidently this patent matter was judged significant enough to exceed that threshold and force an announcement. The press release gave, perhaps, some hint of why it was judged material in such phrases as "entirely new class of cathode materials," "can be used within...liquid lithium ion battery systems currently available," and "significant advantages in terms of both performance and safety." It gets more specific when it refers to "lower cost," "longer life between charges," "improved...number of times the battery could be recharged," and "significant safety advantage." These are big claims. Either Valence is newly engaging in hype, or management thinks the claims are real enough to have potential impact of a material nature. This intrigues me. The second element of the press release that intrigues me is that it suggests a new, independent, low-cost(?) direction for the company to develop its assets. Their announcement was not just to li-poly world, but to the whole rechargeable lithium battery industry. It suggests Valence management is thinking along lines I had not anticipated: it sees the possibility of leveraging some of its research into the general rechargeable lithium world where there might be significant returns. It makes me rejigger my thinking about Valence (the horse) to include a 4th possible profit center. I have been thinking in terms of selling cells, selling laminate, and licensing li-poly cell technology. Now I realize there is another possible source of profit which could prove very interesting: licensing aspects of its technology to the liquid lithium battery industry. This reminds me that Valence intellectual property, represented by the patent portfolio, is not just the moat around their li-poly business, but also is a resource to be mined for whatever value it might have elsewhere. In this vein, it is interesting that Valence would leave its own li-poly domain to announce something which seems big enough to go to the heart of the liquid lithium industry. It intrigues me. In closing, I should also be clear that I do not expect to see immediate, or near-term, licensing fees flowing to Valence from this technology or any other. Rather, I think the matter of developing licensing fees should be considered in light of how we can generally expect Valence to ramp up over the next year to three years. It seems to me Lev is focused now on bringing li-poly production on line, and on his plans to bring on line more production capacity soon. But this press release suggests Lev, and Cal Reed and the board, have also been thinking and planning for many years how the business will evolve within the world of rechargeable lithium batteries. I find it reassuring when a patent of such potential reach suddenly just pops out. EOM -- Regards, lws