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 (10445)	4/15/1999 10:58:00 AM
From: Steve Hegji	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Richard and John: Won't Valence be interested in qualifying for the rest of IBD's funds as soon as possible? Would they hold off announcing a contract knowing that would delay that money? Or would they share the info with IBD without informing the general public? If so, they we may know about a contract indirectly by some announcement of further money from IBD.

To: Rich Wolf who wrote (10445)	4/15/1999 4:01:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

<<We may even finally get a rewrite of the status of the factory (essentially unchanged for 6 months now, according to outdated text left in the SEC documents...>> Your statement that the SEC filings concerning the status of the factory has been left unchanged for 6 months and is therefore, outdated, is not quite correct. If they really are producing and shipping commercially as you are suggesting, why did they bother to put new language, beginning in the March 15 S-3A, that says, "Our current manufacturing technology must be further developed before we will be able to manufacture our batteries in commercial quantities." This is new language that was not included in previous filings. And since it is new language, it is hard to argue that it is simply dated information left over from previous filings.