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: Zeev Hed who wrote (9838)	3/25/1999 11:55:00 PM
From: FMK	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Some comments- 1- The primary purpose of the SEC filings is to fulfill the requirement for disclosing terms of financing etc. Their purpose is not to inform shareholders of company progress. I remember some exellent notes were taken taken during the shareholders meeting and conference calls. 2-None of the naysayers claimed to have attended the shareholders meeting or appear to quote information presented during the conference calls. They instead seem to focus on documents written for a purpose other than reporting company progress. 3-The attorney's drafting the SEC documents make sure that any wording does not state or imply that the company will be successful. If it did, it could be a construed as a written promise and possibly used as evidence in a lawsuit. The attorneys don't want to provide any such basis, especially if the purpose of filing is just an SEC requirement similar to filing a tax return. 4-If Lev were desperate for a contract last fall, he could have accepted a contract to provide accessory batteries. With several testing programs in place as described during the conf calls and SM meeting and no real competition for laptop solid polymer because of the Manganese oxide patents, Lev obviously feels comfortable with the OEM programs and that taking time to do it right is the appropriate course of action. Remember that he has about 2 million shares himself at stake! 5-Remember shareholders comments after meeting Lev and witnessing the videos's of laminate production and the first two assembly and packaging machines and that just the first "line" can earn enough to break even with just one shift per day. The capacity for the three lines should exceed 250 million watt hours per year for three shifts. 6-At $2.50 per watt hour, earlier posted calculations indicate that the first three lines should be capable of earning more per share than Microsoft! Is it time for some short covering?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (9838)	3/26/1999 12:01:00 AM
From: dstand	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Why would buyers pay 7.87 a share today when two days ago they could have had the stock for $6.00? There is no news. The sector is not up. Nothing is in place that was not in place at the beginning of the week when it looked like we might get into the fives again. A very safe and logical prediction at that time would have been $5.75-$6.25 by the end of the week with no news. Are the shorts all of a sudden worried about something? If they were they would have been all over the thread with their poison. Do we have any more reason to believe Lev was going to pull a rabbit out of his hat by the end of March as he hinted at in the last CC? Personally, I was beginning to think we were reading something into what he said. My optimistic guess is that something is about to happen and there are some fortunate people who know about it. I'm not saying there are any leaks from the company. More likely it is coming from a company that is about to do big business with Valence. Tomorrow, we may see some profit taking in the morning and then the rest of the day should tell us a lot. If we lose some ground tomorrow the runup was probably just a fluke and Larry's theory may have been correct. If we put on another half point plus tomorrow I think it is a pretty safe bet there is news around the corner. We all know what that will do to the stock. Today's price will be history. A lot of people will be watching every tick tomorrow and the trigger fingers are going to be itching. I had a ball today. The backsliding may begin again but I'm a happy man for now.

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (9838)	3/26/1999 8:15:00 PM
From: I. N. Vester	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

Zeev, you're a smart guy, why are you trying to give us that 'Altman Z' mumbo jumbo? One does not have to be a professional VC to know that it's put up or shut up time for vlnc and that bankruptcy is one possible outcome. As far as trying to calculate the odds of that, your methodology does not hold water. Does the 'Altman Z' calculation you pointed to take IDB financing into consideration? If not, it is seriously flawed. The other consideration which is impossible to quantify is the CBW quotient. This is a calculation which involves taking Carl Berg's waistline in cm times the number of shares he holds times today's market closing price <VBG>. Seriously Berg is both a physical and financial heavy weight. He owns 5-6 M shares including some 1 M in trust for his kids or his kid's kids. Which is currently a $40M-50M stake. He has very substantial other assets and it is very doubtful that he would let his vlnc stake go to vapor without a fight. We have no actual guarantee of what he will do. He said at the SM 'don't worry about money', but that was off the record. You are correct in that this is a risky play with no guarantee of success. But you are in no position to judge the risks. You don't know where VLNC is in their programs with OEM's. The OEMs have had over 6 months to cycle the batteries over 500 times. If any serious problems had been found, the stock would not be enjoying its currently lofty multiple of the liquidation value of the companies assets. By the way, how did your friend's "Altman Z" calculation value Valence's patent portfolio?