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 (9210)	3/13/1999 11:15:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Rich, I am going to try and look at the S3 again, but being a "selling stock holders" does not mean that they have to register as insiders, all it means is that if CC pledged those shares, the person to whom these were pledged is a selling stock holder for the purpose of that specific registration. Zeev

To: Rich Wolf who wrote (9210)	3/13/1999 11:25:00 AM
From: John Curtis	Respond to of 27311

Rich: Exactly! But I'd expect self-styled pundits to continue to "argue" with you on this point. Meanwhile, on to other matters. I congratulate Mr. Bill. Here I thought both sides had succeeded in poking and prodding each other to the point of developing remarkably thick skins for their antagonistic "relationship." I say this because pokes and prods are still occurring, from time to time(usually intensifying around perceived "important" timeframes), between camps. Mr. Bill managed to poke through longs thick skin, given the reaction. But I'll have to thank him/her for clarifying the position held. Shortie. Therefore all statements made derive from this fact since the name of this game is self-interest, eh? You don't really expect shortie to have any other stance than this, do ya? And since these threads indicate a "chatty" bunch of folks, it's reasonable to assume shortie will try to influence such a thinly traded stock as VLNC is right now. So be it. This position, and the tactics used which include "showing yer hand"(ie. "I've shorted xxx amount," which is probably false but meant to give an impression of "seriousness" because NO ONE show's their card hand when playing this game....but bluffing is a part of the tools employed) is just one natural aspect to the game. Bottom line? Poke, prod, castigate, and cat-a-wail all anyone likes. The roll-off in volume states it matters little. We all be standing around waiting on VLNC to "bust a move." Heh! Now, back to my week-end. John~

To: Rich Wolf who wrote (9210)	3/13/1999 11:27:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Rich, I think you are probably wrong. I would guess Castle Creek could short the common in the market independently of their holding of the preferred shares. They would want to hold onto the preferred shares while they short to act as an insurance policy in case the price takes off. If the price does take off, they convert the preferred shares to common and cover their short position using the common stock they acquired at $6 through the conversion of the preferred shares. If the price decreases to earn them a profit from the price they paid for their short position, they would convert in the open market and wait for the price to go up to start over again. Because the price has not taken off, they haven't had to deliver their common stock to cover their shorts. Therefore, they are still listed as a beneficial owner. If I were a VLNC long, I would be more comfortable thinking the 1.2 million share short position was Castle Creek hedging their investment rather than thinking somebody else acquired such a large short position. In many cases, a large short position in a story stock is bad news because the entities who take such positions usually have thoroughly researched the issue quite thoroughly.