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: lws who wrote (11843)	6/5/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: William Epstein	Respond to of 27311

lws; I agree. They are definitely tying their financials to their construction, production schedule. It is clear that making the NI commitment has depleted the companies resources. They need to raise more capital as working capital. If you recall they delayed the secondary offering as to timing. Your guess is not at all stupidity. Bill

To: lws who wrote (11843)	6/5/1999 6:53:00 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Just to be accurate, Lev didn't mention programs, it was processes. The working to make a deal with an OEM, he said, is a process, and therefore no timely estimate of an order could be made at that time. Just for the record.

To: lws who wrote (11843)	6/6/1999 12:51:00 AM
From: MGV	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27311

Lets take your assumptions or at least the implicit ones. You assume: 1. VLNC's technology is superior, a proprietary technological breakthrough that will yield extraordinary economic rents in the marketplace. 2. VLNC is ready to produce in commercial quantities. 3. VLNC does not yet have a supply arrangement but you "feel" one is imminent. 4. VLNC is experiencing resource constraints that prevent or discourage management from producing and extending potential distribution channels. 5. VLNC is now strong in manufacturing process but weak in distribution and cash flow. 6. Potential distributors such as Everready have not succeeded in opening indirect channels for VLNC if in fact there is or has been an exploratory relationship. Now, if all of this is true, especially the 1st assumption, why would there not be a race to buy a small cap name like VLNC? If assumption 1 is true, then poor distribution is an explanation for the failure to develop multiple supply relationships to OEMs. The juggling act with financial resources would be solved. It would be easy enough to do. And, if, for the sake of argument, VLNC is dealing with Samsung, then more than the misfits on this thread would have knowledge about it. Take out the emotion and the overweight - for at least some of you - financial interest - and respond logically.

To: lws who wrote (11843)	6/6/1999 12:23:00 PM
From: John Curtis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27311

LWS: You've got some points going there. I'd completely over-looked that prior L.D. commentary which, at the original time I'd heard it, made imminent sense to me. You most certain, if you wish to be successful longer term, want to be "in bed" with your OEM clients. And if'n you can get right into their planning cycles....well....so much the better as it makes it that much more difficult for the competition to unseat you. As for Mr. Visnics questions, which weren't that bad, I guess one should look at it this way: You assume: 1. VLNC's technology is superior, a proprietary technological breakthrough that will yield extraordinary economic rents in the marketplace. >>I, meself, assume nothing about the intrinsic "superiority" of their product. But all indications are if they can produce it then they will find an accepting market for it. I leave price considerations aside until after we can see p.o.'s against which all number crunching can be done. 2. VLNC is ready to produce in commercial quantities. >>Yup, this is indicated by the Hanil gambit, not to mention certain "telegraphs" via the London Financial Times, etc.. 3. VLNC does not yet have a supply arrangement but you "feel" one is imminent. >>Supply arrangements appears to be one of those areas VLNC mgmnt remains tight lipped about. And given the secretive nature of the industry I can understand why. As for those "arrangements", I'll once again have to point to the Hanil sale as indications that they've got THAT area nailed down. 4. VLNC is experiencing resource constraints that prevent or discourage management from producing and extending potential distribution channels. >>I don't see this as an tenable assumption. Perhaps you mis-spoke. I see no resource constraints, but am open to you point one or more out. 5. VLNC is now strong in manufacturing process but weak in distribution and cash flow. >>Strong in manufacturing IS an open question. But one which is in the process of being laid to rest. Cash flow weaknesses? Yah, well, we've all been amazed at VLNC's anti-gravity high flying act in that department. Yet they just keep going so from managements viewpoint cash flow doesn't appear to be a problem. And as for distribution....well, they've shipped to Hanil and I haven't heard of any difficulties in doing this. Have you? But I'll admit one shipment don't a process make, so I guess we'll just have to watch how they develop their logistical flow as more orders are shipped. 6. Potential distributors such as Everready have not succeeded in opening indirect channels for VLNC if in fact there is or has been an exploratory relationship. >>True. But I wouldn't expect this until such a relationship is formalized via p.o.'s. Now, if all of this is true, especially the 1st assumption, why would there not be a race to buy a small cap name like VLNC? >>Hmmmmm....good point. The "market knows all" theory, basically, eh? I submit, from watching the past 6 months of range bound bouncy bouncy that in fact a very quiet race to buy into them has been going on. To elaborate on Zeev's prior comments of this nature, every time VLNC has been at the lower end of it's range OBV(On Balance Volume) has jumped to the sky. And I use OBV as an indicator of what "smart money" is doing. As such it's screamin' that smart money is doing just what you have stated.....and that is moving into VLNC. But smart money likes to do its buying "on the cheap", so it looks like they've been "tippy toeing" their way in all while attempting to not prematurely roil the very small pond knowwn as VLNC. Of course, this is all merely my opinion. I could be wrong. Now to go outside and enjoy the day. Regards! John~