Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I don’t know why you couldn’t read the article I cited. Try Google search for “Sealing Court Records and Proceedings: A Pocket Guide” National security is just one of quite a few reasons for sealing court records.
olddog
I was very busy today but I have a friend who is a retired judge
that I called and he said he wasn't sure but he believed that the
courts are not allowed to seal any information from the public
unless it is regarding national security. He said when you go to
a public court system you have chosen to do so and should not be
afforded any private information that the general public can't have.
I will endeavor to get a New York attorney tomorrow and see if
we can get information that is disseminated from a public court made
available. These companies do not need a public court system to
resolve their problems and not expect the public to have access to
any and all information. They have every right to go through
arbitration and have it kept private. This was what a judge said
but he was not 100% on his opinion on this.
JMO
Mickey
olddog
I could not read what you said would make me understand how the
courts can seal information. Even if they say they have a right
that right might be ill found and unconstitutional as information
used to be withheld from the public but the freedom of information
act stopped that.
Here we have public companies ELECTING TO USE THE COURT SYSTEM
INSTEAD OF PRIVATE ARBITRATION. The court house is owned by we the
people the judges are paid by we the people, and any thing stated
or done in a public facility the public should have access to it.
I am going to show my stupidity by seeking a New York attorney
and see if they will do some pro bono work in challenging the
courts right to withhold information from the public in the
interest of a publicly traded company or even a private company.
They elected to use our court house and our judges but don't want
us to know what happens in our place. No one twisted the 2 parties
arm to not use private arbitration and therefore we can't enforce
them to make public what occurred, but when you use the peoples
court then nothing should be withheld.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: For an easy to understand discussion of sealing records vs the public's right to know:
http://www2.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/2012/Sealing_Guide.pdf
Jim
Thanks for your comments on my wife and her shingles. Nurse Mickey
is taking care of her and she will be fine I think in a few days.
Now for the sealed bond I do not quite understand how you can use
a public court and withhold information on a publicly traded
company. The courts are owned by the people and any information
acquired or provided by the court should be made public.
JMO
Mickey
Mickey, Sorry to hear that as shingles from what I heard is a bitch. She's young so I hope she recovers quick.
Mickey, My thought was the information on the bond was sealed so why would you ask anyone if they knew the amount of the bond? You make no sense.
When this breakout occurs its going to be like the shingles painful.
My wife has the shingles and she is in awful pain and that's whats
going to happen with the short sellers. The pain is going to be
almost unbearable, and if they don't cover it will get beyond hurt.
My wife could have gotten a shot and avoided this pain but just
like the shorts not covering she said I will be o.k. till she
wasn't o.k. and now the hurt is on. Shorts you have been warned
'you better get your shot or suffer.
JMO
Mickey
Thinly traded and controlled stock!!!!
Can you imagine what great news will do for this stock. There
appears to be few sellers except for the manipulators that control
the stock right now. When news hits this stock should take off
like a scalded dog. Load the wagon folks you are getting very
close to the announcement that will put us to new highs.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: I would think that Huawei has enough assets that they could pledge to satisfy the bond requirements. In any event, if Huawei loses and a judgment is issued, upon satisfaction of the judgment, the bond will be cancelled.
JimLur
Ah yes I forgot if I tell them Jim Lurgio said call them then
they will immediately give me the information.
JMO
Mickey
Mickey , you asked, "Any way to find out how much the bond was? "
The judges decision on the bond was sealed but I'm sure if you call the judge or Patrick I'm sure they will let you know. LOL
Huawei bond!!!!
Any way to find out how much the bond was? I would say it is
pretty high and seriously doubt a judge would impose the bond
if they thought Huawei had a good chance of getting the arbitration
overturned. I doubt if Paris upholds the arbitration decision that
Huawei would have much of a chance of getting a win in the U.S.
court system. I guess that if Huawei loses they get most of their
bond money back to pay but that is a guess by me. I don't see
Huawei posting a huge bond and could lose all the bond plus lose
the case and have to pay the amount awarded and lose the bond money.
I view the posting of a bond as a plus for IDCC.
JMO
Mickey
How much longer before we see a major break out to the upside???
I can;t believe there is not more buying than what is currently
going on. The company is better off than ever, more cash and
soon to have a whole lot more cash. Huawei should be licensed
and paying both ongoing and back payments. Hopefully we also
get ZTE and LG in April or May. There hopefully will be several
more before the year end. Hopefully there will be lots more back
money coming. I strongly suggest adding on at these prices as they
should look cheap soon. Shorts I think will cover a lot more as
they are not totally stupid.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: You now ask: "why would you agree to arbitration on a expired license? You could have gone to court years ago so why arbitrate what you could have done with no legal
expense of arbitration?"
Apparently you forgot, or did not understand what had occurred in the past regarding LG. Actually, after LG did not renew their license, IDCC did file an infringement action against them.
In Jul 2011, IDCC filed an infringement complaint with the ITC, against Huawei, Nokia, and ZTE (the 800 investigation). In Oct 2011, IDCC requested that LG be added as a respondent. LG opposed IDCC’s request, but in Dec 2011, the ALJ granted the request .
A month later , in Jan 2012, LG moved to terminate the investigation, arguing that its accused 3G products were still covered by its license to IDCC’s patents, and that IDCC’s infringement claim was subject to arbitration because it came under the expired agreement. IDCC and the ITC Staff opposed LG’s motion. Pointing to the plain text of the agreement, they argued that LG did not have an ongoing license for 3G products, as it’s claim to arbitration was “wholly groundless.” However, in Jun 2012, the ALJ issued an initial determination granting LG’s motion to terminate it from the investigation; and In Jul 2012, the ITC Commission declined to review the ALJ’s decision, making it a final determination.
IDCC appealed the termination to CAFC. In a June 2013 decision CAFC reversed the ITC’s termination order by finding that LG’s claim for arbitration was “wholly Groundless”. They remanded the case back to the ITC for further proceedings.
LG then appealed to the U S Supreme Court, and in an Apr 2014 decision the Court declared that the CAFC judgment should be vacated as the issue moot since IDCC had dropped their case against LG at the ITC. The Court also stated that CAFC was wrong in even taking and acting on the case since it did not have jurisdiction.
Separately, in Mar 2012, LG filed a demand for arbitration with the International Centre for Dispute Resolution. The request sought a determination that the expired license agreement gave LG the right to use the patents that IDCC asserted in the ITC proceeding. Apparently the arbitrators agreed that the matter was subject to arbitration
------
What you have to understand is that there is a basic legal principle which in effect is that once the parties are in arbitration the courts will not take on the dispute. Since there was an ongoing arbitration as to whether LG was/was not licensed for 3G, there was no sense in IDCC filing a court action against LG regarding infringement of 3G patents.
Mickey, You got it all wrong.
LG's claim was they had a paid up license for 3-G and the arbitration determined the license for 3-G had expired.
Merritt didn't state LG 3-G was behind us he said the 3-G arbitration was behind us.
You also said, "How in the hell do you arbitrate a non existent expired license?"
Once again all the arbitration was about was whether or not LG had a paid up 3-G license.
olddog
You are right, but the more I thought about it why would you agree
to arbitration on a expired license? You could have gone to court
years ago so why arbitrate what you could have done with no legal
expense of arbitration? I could sue you and you could sue me. If
there is a expired license and you are going to arbitrate if you
can sue? That makes no sense unless you agree the arbitration would
be for a final determination if the prior license gave no free ride
for 3G and you can now sue us which would make no sense but if both
sides agreed that arbitration would decide if you owe for 3G and it
is final and binding.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: In today’s post you come up with a new argument trying to support your idea that there is some secret agreement that the recently concluded arbitration determined if LG owed for 3G. The below statement is another of your non factual arguments.
“How did a decision be reached to ARBITRATE 3G with LG when there was no contract or license agreement any longer in force? There had to be some agreement between the parties that they would agree on arbitration which I believe determined if LG owed for 3G.”
The following is what actually happened.
In one of your previous posts, you posted a copy of the old Jan 2006 license.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=120384827&txt2find=LG|license
If you had bothered to read the entire license you would have found that Section 6.19, the survival clause, provides:
“Survival. The following provisions of this Agreement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement: ……… Article V (dispute resolution),…….”
That wording is very clear, and simply states that after the license expired on Dec 31, 2010, Article V, which calls for arbitration of disputes was still in effect. The courts and the arbitrators determined that the above clause in the expired contract was the basis for going into arbitration, not some special agreement as you posted.
JimLur
How did a decision be reached to ARBITRATE 3G with LG when there
was no contract or license agreement any longer in force? There
had to be some agreement between the parties that they would agree
on arbitration which I believe determined if LG owed for 3G.
Merritt didn't state that IDCC had won the right to sue LG but
rather LG 3G was behind them and it opened doors for working
together. I stand by the Huawei decision will play a big part on
what LG pays.
How in the hell do you arbitrate a non existant expired license?
IDCC could have gone to court years ago and in my opinion should
have.
JMO
Mickey
Tick Tock, Tick Tock!!!!!!
The clock will be striking midnight soon and IDCC will be exploding.
The news should be coming soon that propels IDCC to new highs. I
think it is definitely buying time.
Again my opinion is IDCC is a SCREAMING BUY.
JMO
Mickey
Mickey, You said, "Please explain to me why Merritt would think it necessary to tell us that LG 3G was concluded and behind us? "
He didn't say LG 3-G was concluded he said the LG 3-G arbitration was concluded. Big difference between the two. Keep in mind the arbitration was only about whether or not LG had a paid up 3-G license, nothing else.
Here's the transcript from the CC with Merritt's comments.
"LG, I would say a little bit different in terms of the tools that we would use with them, sort of; it is actually joint research is an opportunity with them. Last year, we successfully concluded the 3G arbitrations, so I think we got that out of the way. I think there is opportunities with them to do some other collaborative items as well."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3908886-interdigitals-idcc-ceo-bill-merritt-q4-2015-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
olddog
Please explain to me why Merritt would think it necessary to tell
us that LG 3G was concluded and behind us? Did he think we thought
that more litigation was forthcoming? What made him be so specific
and not include anything but 3G? I bet we hear something in April
that shows a license with LG accompanied by what amount the back
payments will be. If they had not been waiting on the Huawei results
do you not think they would have had a announcement by now. He
didn't say that there will no longer be any arbitrations as that
is behind us, he made it clear that LG 3G was concluded and behind
us.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: You state that I am dead wrong when I stated that "I believe IDCC and LG have been trying to negotiate a new license for some time."
As the saying goes, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Although I don't believe it is true, how can you repeatedly post that IDCC and LG have a secret agreement that will become effective after a Huawei license is signed. That supposed agreement didn't just materialize out of thin air, there must have been negotiations.
In addition, you apparently forgot that the Delaware Chancery Court case was about IDCC's disclosure of settlement communications to the arbitrators.
bulldzr
Isn't it amazing that at this site you can actually have a opinion
and others can have their disagreeing opinion and they can call you
names and their post stands. Why everyone doesn't post here and
breathe nice fresh air and feel free to stand up for their opinions.
I thought this was what chat boards were designed for but it appears
that on some boards its see it my way or don't post here. Even if
you are wrong its your right to be wrong and stand by your opinion.
No where does it state your opinions must be factual and right.
How many things do we enjoy today that was invented by people
who made many wrong decisions before hitting on the thing we use
today?
We just don't allow vulgarity, and who am I to tell you that you
have to be right as I could be wrong. Life is wonderful and I am
lucky to be enjoying it. Now if you can't stand up for what you
believe you are not much of a person. Now having said that you
should also be able to say I am sorry or I am wrong in life.
I would love to see this board grow and we get diverse views. One
never knows where one might gain knowledge from.
JMO
Mickey
olddog
You are right no one can convince me of that but instead of a
monetary amount they couldn't tell us because in my opinion they
nor even IDCC doesn't know the full amount till after Huawei is
finalized on that amount. I fully believe once the Huawei amount
is finalized then a LG 3G amount for back and ongoing will be
established.
Now you made a comment they have being talking about a license on
going. You are dead wrong as in 5 years and you can't come to a
agreement then you better go straight to court as you will never
get a agreement.
Please explain why Merritt chose the words he chose to tell us
about the LG arbitration. His choice of words would put IDCC at
risk for legal action as it was clear the arbitration was over.
I assure you people invested money based on his comments.
JMO
Mickey
Mickey... Take it to the limit... one more time...
"You can spend all your time, makin' money, or you can spend all your love, makin' time..."
These hippies sho could sing...
"Now you or no one else can ever convince me that LG 3G is not
concluded and behind us."
Is that the same as no one was able to convince you that the LG arbitration award did not include a monetary amount?
olddog
According to the 2006 agreement more than just 2G was involved.
Now Merritt is not stupid and he well knew the arbitration was
concluded and no more. He however didn't specify anything to us
when he clearly stated only that the LG 3G was concluded and behind
us. You can not conclude LG 3G if any thing is left but the
finalization of what you have definitely agreed on predicated on
a certain event or rate that LG has agreed to once this rate is
assigned or agreed to by another party. At that time you insert
the rate and sign the final license for 3G, and maybe the rest
of the technology also. LG owes back money for sure on any and all
sales of 3G products.
Now you or no one else can ever convince me that LG 3G is not
concluded and behind us.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: Although you again are incorrect in comments made, I will no longer point out those errors. Your mind is so made up, that in effect my posts go in one ear and out the other, and just give you the opportunity to respond with the same old, or slightly varied, erroneous statements.
I just want to add that I believe IDCC and LG have been trying to negotiate a new license for some time. If an agreement is reached it will be because both parties finally found it mutually beneficial, and that is all there is to it.
IDCC shows off their technology starting today!!!!!
This should boost interest in IDCC. Hopefully we see a turnaround
day and the stock rally's when people and companies see the
technology at work. I hope this baby is about to pop.
IEEE COMSOC Debuts InterDigital’s Creating the Living Network Webinar Series
Mobile Edge Computing Kicks Off Webinar Series on March 24InterDigital, Inc.
March 21, 2016 1:30 PM
GlobeNewswire ????Content preferences Done WILMINGTON, Del., March 21, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Future mobile networks will change everything about how we live, work, and interact. InterDigital, Inc. (IDCC), a mobile technology research and development company, will showcase these impacts in its Creating the Living Network™ webinar series hosted by the IEEE Communications Society set to start on March 24th.
The six-webinar series will focus around the concept of the Living Network: a future where intelligent networks self-optimize to deliver service that is tailored to the content, context and connectivity of the user, device or need. During the series, the 60-minute webinars will address topics that include how to:
Create it through emerging 5G technologies and standards;
Connect it through Internet of Things (IoT) interoperability and applications; and
Live it through game-changing IoT and 5G use-cases.
“Create it – Bring it closer with Mobile Edge Computing” will kick off the series on Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 2 PM EDT. Dexter Johnson, author of IEEE Spectrum's blog The Nanoclast, will moderate a dynamic panel discussion with experts from Nokia, XCellAir and InterDigital on the challenges and benefits of mobile edge computing, with an emphasis on the small cell environment. To register for the webinar, click here.
This show hopefully will be overwhelming to the people who see
this technology working.
JMO
Nickey
Here is why Merritt's words mean something to me!!!!!
Here is the definition of conclusion, and to be clear any damn
fool knew the arbitration was concluded hence you would only
say arbitration has concluded. Here is the definition of conclude.
con·clude.
[k?n'klo?od]
VERB
1.bring (something) to an end:
"they conclude their study with these words" ·
[more]
synonyms: finish · end · draw to a close · be over · stop · cease ·
[more]
Now using that definition how can Merritt say LG 3G has concluded
and is now behind us? Either he thinks we are idiots and didn't
understand that the arbitration was over and had the idea that
telling us that LG 3G not arbitration but clearly LG 3G was
concluded and behind us. He didn't say arbitration has concluded
and behind us but clearly LG 3G can't be more specific than that
but LG 3G has concluded and behind us, which clearly means the
LG 3G will not be challenged by either side it has concluded and
is behind them.
JMO
Mickey
olddog
According to your assumptions on LG must not have owed IDCC a thing
for the use of 3G, then why did IDCC win the arbitration in fact
why did IDCC seek to get paid for 3G? Now when IDCC won and even
sought legal fees from the U.S. courts. If all IDCC won was a right
to go to court they had that right from any day as anyone can sue
anyone any time. No sane person would declare what was a win in the
arbitration that only allowed you to sue them if necessary would
ever make a statement that LG 3G was concluded and behind them.
Those words are clear to me there is nothing more to be litigated
that the LG 3G dispute was concluded and behind them. Further
litigation would be a long way from concluded and behind them.
You would tell the shareholders we won the no arbitration but you
would never declare LG 3G is concluded and behind us. If they go
to court I personally will spend my money to sue Merritt for
misrepresenting the LG 3G dispute.
JMO
Mickey
mickey: In regard to you answer to my question it is what I expected, and confirms that you have no idea what the LG license and subsequent actions were about.
The following are actual facts, not opinions.
In Jan 2006 IDCC entered into a fixed fee, five year term license that expired on Dec 31, 2010. Under the terms of the agreement, LG paid IDCC $95 million in each of the first quarters of 2006, 2007, and 2008. The total payment of $285 million was all that LG was required to pay. The total payment covered.
(1) the sale of terminal units compliant with 2G and 2.5G TDMA-based and 3G Standards.
(2) the sale of a limited amount of infrastructure compliant with cdma2000 technology and its extensions.
(3) a release for any infringement claims that IDCC might have for any terminal units that LG sold before the Jan 1, 2006 effective date of the agreement. (i.e. past sales)
(4) upon expiration, a paid-up license to sell single-mode GSM/GPRS/EDGE terminal units. (i.e. the 2G paid up license)
Each of the above factors has a monetary value, however, as the license was for a lump sum fixed fee, there were no separate values or royalty fees related to each item. Therefore, under IDCC’s accounting procedures “We are recognizing revenue associated with this agreement on a straight-line basis from the inception of the agreement until December 31, 2010.”
For you to keep saying that LG signed an agreement and is not paying under that agreement is a complete misstatement of the facts. As described above, LG had an agreement and made all required payments under that agreement. Once the agreement expired on Dec 31, 2010, except for the paid up 2G units described above, LG became unlicensed as to all other products covered by the agreement, and had no legal obligation to pay IDCC. . Because LG was no longer licensed, in Oct 2011, IDCC filed at the ITC an infringement action against them.
So unless you have other facts, please stop saying that LG signed a license and has refused to pay under that license (or similar wording). Just saying it is your opinion, without any basis , means it is a worthless statement that has no value even as an opinion.
It's due time to bury the hatchet. Let's just agree to disagree and move on for the ride we expect.
JimLur and olddog
Thank goodness I have this board and I can have my opinions and
if you and olddog don't agree well that's life. I believe every
word I post.
Now Jim you asked why would anyone that owns IDCC want to pay $60.00
or higher, what about the original QCOM owners that didn't buy at
$60.00 and split adjusted would have been worth $3,000 bet they
wish they bought at $60.00. Money is to be made and stocks go a lot
higher than $60.00 and I see the fundamentals exploding and the
expenses declining.
DWS this is for you I know the bonuses are based on past performance
but I have a gut feeling they were awarded what they are getting
well knowing big money was coming.
I stand by no CEO would say LG 3G is concluded and behind us with
nothing signed or agreed on already. That statement makes zero
sense. You might say the arbitration has concluded but no way in
hell has 3G been concluded without a agreement on what they will
agree on based on something.
Olddog this is for you did LG sign a license when they signed the
kicense for 2G and 3G? Now if you have signed a license for 3G
and don't pay and go to any damn court IDCC decides to carry them
to will they say we never intended to pay the 3G part as the license
expired.
JMO
Mickey
olddog, It would be impossible for Mickey to answer your questions. He just don't comprehend or understand the difference between black and white.
Many investors like you that have great comprehension skills and others that understand the legal issues of the LG arbitration have gone to great length to explain how wrong he is on his thoughts.
He also fails to think with the stock having 70% + ownership by institutions that if they were upset as Mickey they would be selling their shares.
JMO
Mickey, Why not bury LG as you have no idea what your talking about.
JMO
Mickey, "Lets see who will be the first to post they bought at $60.00"
Why would any of us that own shares at these levels and much lower than that would want to add more shares at 60?
If you remember that's why you busted out having according to you 16 million and lost almost everything.
If anyone would buy at 60 IMO it will be institutions.
I don't think like you do the stock will see a 100 or 200 price tag but think the stock will split as to give the institutions more room to trade or buy in.
JMO
mickey: I have a hard time trying to understand what you are talking about.
You asked the question "How can LG defend having signed a agreement and then no pay and want to go to court?".
My questions are:
What signed agreement are you talking about?
What do you mean that they (LG) didn't pay and want to go to court?
What court are you talking about?
Please answer each question separately, and be specific.
Mickey,
The performance awards given to management are for past performance.
If the agreements that you feel are coming do in fact come, these awards will seem like chicken feed.
MO
LG 3G concluded and behind us!
The LG 3G was concluded and behind us is a true statement as no
way you can say 3G was concluded and behind us and 3G was still
up in the air. How can LG defend having signed a agreement and
then no pay and want to go to court? Just because the date of
that agreement ended does not mean you don't have to pay and if
LG and IDCC didn't come to a agreement with terms being based on
the Huawei rate then no way the CEO could possibly describe the
LG 3G not being paid as being concluded and behind us, no way as
the 3G part would still be open for litigation not concluded.
The Huawei decision is going to be big and hopefully IDCC prevails
and they get LG and the big bonuses will be accepted as earned.
We absolutely should look forward to recurring revenues jumping
and legal expenses declining. This should create a huge price
increase. Don't be stupid and miss a great opportunity to load uo
before the news hits.
JMO
Mickey
Lets see who will be the first to post they bought at $60.00.
I would like to see a post of who bought at the new brackets
starting at $60.00 and each new level we break. The stock is
beyond a doubt going to break $70.00 I truly believe by the end
of April.
JMO
Mickey
IDCC bonuses!!!!
I think IDCC sees huge money coming in soon and they can't wait
to get their hands on the cash. If not a lot of new money coming
in I think they would never grant these bonuses.
JMO
Mickey
I will say this once again!!!
Buy them while they are still cheap not many more days to have
this opportunity. Buying a stock that will be worth over $200.00
a share in 2 years should be a good decision.
When this stock breaks out you if you haven't bought will either be
sick or chasing it. IDCC should soon be seeing back money and
increasing ongoing revenues. I see by the end of April, Huawei, LG,
ZTE, and by the end of the year at least 3 more besides these.
All new license will be accompanied by back payments, and all
increasing ongoing revenues. Look for large 1 time dividend
payments, and a increase of probably 2 dividend payments annually.
I predict the stock will be in the $70.00 or higher handle by
the end of April. Legal expenses should decline dramatically all
going to the quarterly earnings and they can pay the shareholders
the money they had been spending on legal expense.
It has taken about 50 years but IDCC is now being recognized as
a leader in M2M and Internet of things and 5G. Just buckle up
buy and don't worry about the daily swings, you should be in for
great times.
JMO
Mickey
I seriously doubt the license agreement said the 3G license ends in 2010. If it doesn't clearly say the 3G ends in 2010 they are responsible for what they had already agreed on.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/354913/000119312506107083/dex1082.htm
In addition, provided Licensee is not in default under this Agreement at the end of the Term, Licensee shall be fully paid-up under and for the life of the Licensed Patents as to GSM Licensed Terminal Units only at the end of the Term.
Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and terminate on December 31, 2010, unless sooner terminated as provided herein.
Challenge to JimLur, olddog and others!!!
Just what do you think transpired at the arbitration with LG, when
you have a company that has signed a 2G and 3G license and had no
right to any arbitration as that agreement had expired. Now do you
think that LG can say we never intended to sign a 3G license and
pay? How far will they get with not paying IDCC when they had signed
a license to pay. How about the arbitration said you lose and you
had agreed to pay for 3G and that was not a exemption and if you
thought you should not pay then you should have gone to court long
long ago and not try to ride the no longer pay for 2G. Tell me what
any court will say when you go there and have already signed a 3G
license but don't want to pay. I seriously doubt the license
agreement said the 3G license ends in 2010. If it doesn't clearly
say the 3G ends in 2010 they are responsible for what they had
already agreed on. You sure do not tell shareholders that the
LG 3G disagreement has been concluded and behind us with only a
resolution that no arbitration means it is concluded. The whole
thing that is to be concluded was do you owe for 3G or do you get
a free ride, that was what was at stake.
JMO
Mickey
The more I think about the LG 2G 3G license agreement!!!
How can LF expect to enforce the paid up 2G and not honor the 3G
part they signed. They will never in my opinion be able to get
away from paying what they had agreed to pay. Yes the license
agreement had expired but would that mean you can exercise the
right for free use of 2G but don't want to pay what you agreed to
pay for 3G? I don't think you have it both ways.
JMO
Mickey
People are you not smart enough to see what is about to happen????
You have Huawei coming up who has already lost arbitrations and
appealing the loss. You have LG losing a arbitration and do you
actually think they will say we signed a 3G license but it was a
temporary license and we never intended to pay for our use of 3G
after December 31 2010, or do you think they will honor their word
and wiggle by saying we misunderstood what we did and we will now
honor our word? Then ZTE has pressure to license. Now is the time
to be buying not in April when you can be paying $17.00 or more
per share. Buying in April will still make you lots of money but
not buying now knowing what should be forthcoming just doesn't
make sense. They are giving shares away right now.
Yes I bought options for June, and September. I believe I will make
good money on the purchases.
JMO
Mickey
JimLuR AND olddog
Stop and think if you was the CEO and all you got from the
arbitration was LG had no right to arbitrate. Would you tell the
shareholders you was happy that LG 3G was concluded and behind you,
and not say we won they had no right to arbitrate and after all
these years we can finally sue if they don't agree to a license
right away, or say nothing about the status with LG? To not so
inform the shareholders your win was for nothing but what they had
no right to pursue for 5 years and we now have to start what we
should have been able to do years ago. Now if you have a pending
deal whioh is not announceable till the signing then you can be
happy and say it is concluded and behind us as apparently the
negotiating is over and the rate has been set depending on the
Huawei rate. Anything other than that will make you look like a
complete fool.
Look for news in April and hopefully ZTE will make it a 3 bagger.
One thing for sure the market is slowly ratcheting the stock up
and I look for that to continue and by the end of April hopefully
we will be in or over the $70.00 price range.
With M2M growing and the incoming Internet of things and if I am
right and we get a 3 bagger the others will be coming soon I think.
Hopefully Microsoft/Nokia agree to a reasonable license along
with back payments. Mentioning back payments Huawei, LG, and ZTE
alone should be over a billion, and we see a nice one time dividend
along with a doubling of the existing dividend. The ongoing revenues
certainly should say a double would be no problem, and the legal
expenses declining.
JMO
Mickey
JimLur
And just how would a firm have grounds for a class action law
suit and not have the facts? I don't think that if LG and IDCC
made a in principal agreement based on certain events that can
be agreed on but is not a license till it is signed and if it
is based on certain things on the Huawei finalization then no
deal is done, just agreed to be done based on these events.
In my opinion no way LG could be concluded and put behind them
unless as I stated once what ever they agreed on has been discovered
and put in the license agreement then they have a license. Olddog
needs to stick to providing information but his reading the tea
leaves may need overhauling.
JMO
Mickey
Followers
|
47
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
11305
|
Created
|
02/09/10
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderator mickeybritt | |||
Assistants nicmar |
This is Mickey's Telecom Corner
This board is for the discussion of any stock of your choice, with specific emphasis around the Telecom industry in general and 3G and 4G wireless technologies. Since this board is in the "free zone", posts should remain on topic. Spirited disagreement and argument will be tolerated as long as it doesn't involve personal attacks and name calling, and an effort should be made to avoid pizzing matches over topics of an irrelevant or personal nature.
Thanks all - freedom comes with responsibilities
Mickey
SURVEYS: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board_surveymenu.asp?board_id=17057
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |