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: Ray who wrote (9877)	3/26/1999 2:56:00 PM
From: Mark Johnson	Respond to of 27311

<<If you have more convincing evidence that VLNC has has not shipped commercial samples to potential customers, please post it.>> Ray: Larry can't do that because all he has done, his total and myopic point of view is based on SEC document interpretation. You see, Valence does not put the text of the Conference Calls or the text of the Shareholder Meeting in their 10Q's. Lev stated at the share holder meeting that he could not confirm or deny whether Valence had sent product to their "customers" because if he did confirm product was shipped and Larry for instance bought stock on that premise and the batteries proved to be inferior for that "customers" use and the stock price tanked a guy like Larry would likely sue the company, putting all other shareholders equity at risk. A good example of that very scenario is when ulbi announced a contract with Mitsubishi and they began to ship hand assembled product, the stock soared, ulbi couldn't sustain production, the stock plummeted the shareholders are currently suing. (As a side note Zeev thought a small contract would have benefited vlnc when the reality is the opposite). Zeev was a strong supporter of ulbi recently and it seems ulbi is in a "death spiral" of its own without a floorless! Some think I insult Larry and Zeev excessively. Just look at Zeev's record here. He came on board predicting the eventual demise of Valence through a "death spiral" by virtue of their financing package. Since then the "floorless bandits" have amended their terms with Valence on a more favorable score and Lev said at the shareholder meeting financing was not a serious concern confirmed by Ieleen at FRB. Yet, Zeev continues to hammer on the issue. I belive the position that Larry and Zeev have taken is tantamount to calling Lev Dawson a liar! Personnally I find it hard to believe Zeev Hed can be so presumptuous to predict a "death spiral", that Valence would choke on a $50mm purchase order, and disregarding statements from Lev during conferance calls and at the shareholder meeting. These presumptions are made from a standpoint of ignorance as to the true condition of the company. What kind of insult is that to Valence, the Board, the Officers the shareholders and to institutional investors, when someone continually posts from a negative bias and from points of ignorance, presuming way too much as to the condition of the company. I call it irresponsible!

To: Ray who wrote (9877)	3/26/1999 9:07:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

Ray, I have no evidence VLNC is not shipping commercial samples other than their official company statements. My question to you is do you have evidence they are? If so, please post it. I am not aware of any statement that says "we are shipping commercial samples" made by the company via PR, conference call, SEC filing, or any other official source. I don't buy the premise they are afraid of being sued if they say they are shipping commercial samples and then they don't get a contract right away. They certainly could couch the statement with the appropriate disclaimers (extensive testing required, no guarantee that the samples will meet the requirements of OEMs) to avoid legal difficulties. Their filings demonstrate that they are very familiar with the use of disclaimers. And I don't confuse a dislcaimer (no guarantees) with a statement of fact (we have no products for sale, we have not shipped any commercial samples to any customers). Until I know differently, I will assume the filings are correct. They have been so far, and all the speculation to the contrary on this thread over the last 2 years hasn't.