I think we've blown past out 5 year high, haven't we?

My God, this is fun.

Interesting. This new arbitration request comes 9 months to the day? after the findings of the original binding arbitration were released.

Binding - I love that word. In Finnish, it means "ehhh, maybe, maybe not."

Piper Jaffray just went out on a limb. Old Target Price 19. New Target price 22

Spencer, you're right. I'd only gone to the link, not the PDF file. Thanks for clarification.

Go to the News link and type in Nokia in advanced search. It looks like the date for written submissions has been pushed back to December 12th. At least it's December 12th of this year.

Yep. Another "buying opportunity." This stock certainly has a lot of buying opportunities.

Learning2vest - Beeaauuttiiffuull eom

OT- M6
My reply was not aimed at you. Apparently I just hit the reply button after your post. Don't have IHUB membership so can't reply privately.

Pahuki
Nokia's counsel has quoted from this board, at least one, maybe two analysts have publicly referred to this board, and an investment publication (I think it was Forbes) has made a comment re:this board. Apparently other people do read it. All this talk of how Merritt and/or Fagan said we'd get at least one license by the end of the 3rd quarter and so they better deliver, I would not consider it a negotiating tool on IDCC's side if negotiations are indeed still ongoing. Probably doesn't matter. Whatever.
Good night.

Oliver Stone

Assuming that our competitors, licensees, and potential licensees also read this board, and many of you have made that assumption, could we not also assume that the lather some of you have worked up over a 3G license by the end of the quarter, who said what, etc., etc., might just hinder, or to put it bluntly, screw up what ever negotiations we are currently in with those potential licensees? GIVE IT A REST, please.

Anybody - how do you do ignores

price too

Nic, there was little movement because the stock wasn't allowed to move. Trading was halted ALL DAY that Friday, when it would have moved significantly if it had been allowed to open for even the last hour or two. Instead, we had to wait for four days and then get blasted by Nokia's temper tantrum right at the open on Tuesday AM. I honestly think this stock would be trading higher today if it had been allowed to trade on July 1.

Carpenter's report got us back over 18 for about an hour. Unbelievable.

12 Bees - If Jorma came to MY house for dinner, he would be wise not to eat.

After reading the Forbes and IBD articles and to a lesser extent the analyists updates, it absolutly amazes me that no mention is made in any, of Nokia's behavior throughout this process.

Thanks. eom

Thank you Orientbull AND L2V. I finally understand the poison pill concept. Now, if somebody will tell me what TOS stands for, I'll feel completely caught up.

Yeah, Helsinki, home of the Good Guys. I actually went into a cell phone dealer a couple of weeks ago to buy a replacement phone. The saleswoman showed me a Nokia. I told her, no thanks, anything but Nokia. She asked why, and I gave her a brief talk about preferring to buy from a manufacturer who is willing to pay for the use of other's technology. The manager listened in, and was pretty interested, although they probably still sold the same number of Nokias that week that they would have sold if I hadn't dropped by in the first place. Still, it felt good to say it.

Nokia's working with Intel on a project, huh? Hope Intel's smart enough to get Nokia to pay their share in advance.

But if the parties were told that there was a delay, wouldn't they in the same respect be required to inform their shareholders that they had been notified of a delay?

Mschere, my impression has been that neither of the parties had been contacted at all by the ICC. And it's hard for me to picture either party being notified of a delay and requesting that they not be told the reason for the delay. Maybe so. Don't know.

Nice to see a more positive tone on the board today and very nice to see the Corp Buyer discussions have finally faded. But I gotta say this: The ICC had just slightly less than an eternity to arrange this arbitration, listen to the arguements, render a decision, review the decision, render a judgement, review it again, etc., etc.. We were told by these guys that notification would take place on or before May 31. It is now a week later and not a word. There is a good possibility that the delay is for a very valid reason, but in my mind, their apparent lack of any communication with the involved parties addressing this delay is rude, inconsiderate, and unprofessional. They don't have to give a reason for the delay, although that would be nice, but they could at least acknowledge it.

Olddog - Thanks for the lead on the Atomic Board's ASM reports. EOM

Just got back from a couple of hours with my friend Yuengling and away from IDCC and IHUB. Have spent the last twenty minutes catching up on posts of people spitting at each other re: Corp Buyer and his good or bad intentions. Thought by now there would be a few posts from attendees at the ASM. Any reports from them?

The Dow's gains have tanked over 50% and Nasdaq over 50%. IDCC's still up and its drop is on weak volume. Relax Ricardo

enough

Amen, Captain!!

Danny, agree 100% on your point. eom

Come on Miller; give it a rest.

cc at 10:00 EST or 11:00? Thanks

I apologize for bringing this up in the first place. I had simply noted that Merrill, or as Jai is most likely correct in saying, a Merrill client or clients have had shares available at $16.70. I don't think that today's volume says much of anything about Merrill's feelings about IDC.
Anyway, it's good to see some screamin' and hollerin' on this board again. My own technical analysis has shown that oftentimes this board gets the loudest right before a nice upward move.

my-3 - FWIW it appears that they're not recommending selling - they're just selling.

Merrill has a steady supply of shares for sale at 16.70. They did the same thing a couple of days ago at the same price.

I liked her brevity

thanks, ziploc & bulldzr. eom

Great reading tonight. Some good stuff.
One issue I have and would like clarified by the legal readers is this. If the opening of the files that Nokia is requesting is a "non-issue", why didn't IDCC just let them rather than have the issue go up before the Judge. I follow this board closely, but don't remember if this was brought up before.
Thanks.

O.T. Oui.
Last one here too, Jim

Fla ggg, your knowledge of football, handicapping, and wagering is impressive. I would have to assume that you have collaborated with some pretty bright minds in this subject over the past few years. :/)