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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Microvision (MVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/11/1999 10:12:00 AM
From: Josef Svejk	Respond to of 7720

unicomcorp.com

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/11/1999 10:33:00 AM
From: JDN	Respond to of 7720

Dear Casey: May I compliment you on a very thoughtful and intelligent post. One of the best I have ever read anywhere. I even clicked on your profile to see who this Superman was, but alas you have nothing in it. The further potential dilution does in fact seem real. The rather large numbers you mention in the military contracts likely will require a lot of money for Working Capital. Have you any thoughts on that? JDN

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/11/1999 11:07:00 AM
From: CAP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

Casey, WOW! Nice job!! CAP EOM

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/11/1999 6:26:00 PM
From: Robert Faust	Respond to of 7720

Casey, A remarkable effort and an incisive analysis of the potential earnings that may accrue to Microvision via the Army. My deepest thanks. Hopefully someone at Microvision will take notice and perhaps one day soon we will see a similar analysis/potential of the Navy and Air Force programs. Though Microvision may not be able to make such projections directly, I've always been mystified by their inability to find an analyst who would. Until they do, the stock will likely remain undervalued. R.F.

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/11/1999 10:11:00 PM
From: dwight martin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

GOOD article, Casey - it obviously took a lot of time and it is a real service to the thread. My questions center on the costs of the VRD (esp. the $125K for Comanche, and the $250K for Apache). There are two factors which cause me to be skeptical of such high sales prices. First, Microvision has concentrated much effort on reducing the size and cost of the VRD, preferring, I believe, to sell 100 million units at $200 per, rather than 100,000 units at $20,000. Batch manufacturing will help them reach this goal. Second, the trend in procurement is to use commercial, "off-the-shelf" components whenever possible, and assuming reasonable budgets 4-5 years down the road (by which time Microvision will have commercial personal VRD displays for sale at Wal-Mart), there will be great resistance to paying "salon" prices for VRD. These two factors, it seems to me, make it unlikely that Microvision will garner anything like the per unit costs you mention for the VRD, unless they get the whole job, not just the chance to supply VRD units to someone like Boeing. (Yes, I know that Microvision is the prime in the VCOP contract, but that is an R&D effort only at this stage, and I am not aware that Microvision has expertise running much beyond the VRD units themselves.) I agree with your estimates of the probability of the Army contract awards, and also think we will get some others from the Navy and the USAF. Plus, the Brits know a good thing when they see it. Still, I think Microvision's DOD contracts are fulfilling the traditional "learning curve" function for new technology, and that the company's long-term growth prospects will be derived mainly from the civilian market.

To: Casey W who wrote (2100)	3/12/1999 2:55:00 AM
From: kili	Respond to of 7720

I'd like to join in on the round of applause for Casey. Excellent post. During these last few days, I've sensed that a lot of you, like me, have been nothing short of very frustrated. It feels simply 'unjust' that MVIS should finish a day with total trading volume only representing a few 100 thousand in gross turnover. 16,500 shares yesterday... In October '97, the NASDAQ comp. stood at 1,750. MVIS peaked at 19 or there about. Today, the NASDAQ is +38%, and MVIS is down more than 20%. It's difficult to accept that kind of development when we positively know that the company is much closer to commercial success than ever before. Your comments, Casey, on the IR efforts are justified. The success of MVIS has a lot to do with what they can make out of the market's interest in the shares. Of course, nobody would like to see the stock hyped up beyond all realism, but there are a lot of positions that could be attained before having to fear too high expectations reflected in the share price. The caution for giving forward looking statements represents a careful approach, and although I'm not familiar with the regulations in the US market, I'd expect them to be similar to what we have in my country. But, and there ought to be a few 'buts' here, there ought to be ways to illustrate at least a couple of features. For starters, it would be important to know if the expected price tag on a helmet mounted display is 25 or 200 thousand dollars. If these figures mean disclosing company secrets, they could at least say that... At least explain to us why they can't disclose anything! You've summed up a few bottom line dollars for earnings related to (some) military use of VRD. 5, to be precise. Multiply those with anything between 20 and 40, give the sum a 50% chance of coming true, and we're talking share prices between $50 and $100. For starters. Kim