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.
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.
Question: Since the original arbitration results were quite likely taking into account Judge Lynn's order, which has now been overturned, can the arbitration committee re compute its original award based upon the new parameters? Nok has had every chance to pay based upon an award they said they were happy with and most likely differed from IDCC's numbers due to Judge Lynn's ruling. Does the arb panel have the power to say to nok " you snooze-you lose", the numbers have now changed?
What possibly could nok hope to gain by adopting this self destructive policy of refusing to cooperate with the ICC and thumbing its nose at the US courts? If this goes the distance, nok will not only have lost needless money, but also will have established a reputation of being very uncooperative, untrustworthy, and having an utter disregard for the US legal system. This is not the kind of company anyone would want to do business with and further disputes will carry this reputation as a precedent that will be hard to live down. The only thing that makes sense to me is that nok believes or has previous assurance that if they drag this out, a white knight will come to the rescue and buy out their nemesis-alleviating nok of any wrong doing and any financial obligations.JMHO.
Loop-Thanks for report-Love phrases like brain behind wireless infrastructure,world leader in data transmission, and dizzying growth potential. Now it's time for the courts to do their due dilligence and give IDCC what is rightfully theirs for the technology they have created. Keep the good news coming!
Loop-Anyway to share the report and the reasons behind his pick etc?-thanks
For anyone(including analysts) to react in march 06 to revenues produced between july and september of 05 is absurd. The post earnings release slide in price certainly can not be attributed to looking out 6 months as the market supposedly does, because our future has never been brighter and the prospects of much higher revenues could be right around the corner. This is options related and a temporary blip on the screen.
Sure can tell its options week-is this quadruple witching?
I love the buyback-$100 MIL to support the price and another 3 mil shares off the table. Buyout price per share just went up.
Hello McFly-Anybody Home? The market's early reaction just proves that at all perception is limited and that at any point in time, price reflects the degree of ignorance of buyer and seller. After listening to the conference call, all I can say is WOW-this management team has its act together and is focused on delivering(YES,Corp to its shareholders)and will execute their plan.GOOD LUCK TO ALL LONGS!
Magilla-Was that a Dick Cheney look a like named Bill at your meeting or the real deal?
L2V-I think your views are correct and this leads me to questioning why nok continues to draw this thing out. How do they benefit and what do they expect to get? The only conclusion I can come to is that this is somehow tied to their complaints in Europe re royalty rates and qcom's excessive demands re wcdma. If qcom bought out IDCC would nok's obligations to IDCC disappear and be absorbed under its current license with qcom? Just speculation on my part, but this continual undermining and delay by nok seems to have some other motive behind it than just rate negotiation.
Thanks Revlis-Very interesting situation developing imo, with nok and european cartel taking on qcom in a battle to cap royalty rates. Both camps would love to control our portfolio, so let the games begin. Five billion ought to take care of it. Would be very happy to take $80 in the next 12 months rather than betting on the come with all the variables we cannot control.
Revlis-Wasn't aware that poison pill expired at end of year-not that it couldn't be extended-but still very interesting, and I do believe that nok's stall tactics are related to keeping price down. Just not sure who the suitor will be.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my perception of essentiality is that the elite of wireless got together to form a board to supposedly ensure compatability for ongoing generations of wireless technology. Essentiality is just another form of control and not a test of validity of ipr. The bottom line is this: Company A KNOWS whether or not it is using Company B's patents to produce their product(s). If the technology wasn't necessary to produce the product then why use it? Esentiality, validity etc. is just a part of a word game of trying to get something for nothing. Simply put, you use it-you pay. I cannot see the Supreme Court giving companies a chance to invalidate a patent after it has licensed for that patent. Business in this country would come to a standstill and you may as well say good-bye to the technology edge that the US now holds. JMHO
I like the settle or else mandate. This entire sector has become suit crazy-I guess we will have to see if they and others get the message or more drastic measures will be taken by the legal system to protect US ipr.
Finland gets pounded by US women's hockey team-about to get pounded again by another woman in court-attorney Addison.
songioan-LG wasn't a part of this cartel of companies that wanted to put a lid on rates.
It is easy to get caught up in the minutiae of all the legal wranglings going on and miss the key question behind it all-WHY? I would love to know what our management thinks is the real reason behind this fixation by nok with our company. Even more so, there has to be corporate documents behind nok's strategy and an end game result that nok deems as probable. To think that nok is trying to get the best price for itself is naive-that would have been negotiated a long time ago. The fact that the other tier 1 oems have not broken from the pack while nok plays its legal games, hints at a collusive strategy in my opinion. Can this ever be proved and if so what good would it serve? What event will cause the others to break ranks and sign a license that is in the best interest of their company? If in fact IDCC prevails against nok, rational belief would have the others following LG's lead and sign a contract. I have a feeling that phase 2 of the cartel strategy has been well planned and that a buyout will be attempted on a friendly basis. I know most here don't believe this will happen, but consolidation will occur and our company was made for the buyout at the right price. I would love to see the price over $100 before splitting etc., but I think the realities of scale will dictate our fate. Understanding the WHY behind what is going on should give us all a better perspective as to where we are headed. THIS IS ALL JMHO.
The only thing that seems to make sense of this nok stalling charade is if it is a part of some indemnification agreement with another company.The numerous lawsuits have tried to belittle IDCC's patent portfolio and have been successful at keeping the stock price down for a suitor to make a low ball bid.The current rumors re a bid by qualcomm actually make sense in this scenario if qcom is indeed the indemnifier. If this is the plan, then the LG license along with the inroads the 2nd tier manufacturers are making in 3g, have thrown a monkey wrench into the plan big time. The rumored buyout price has gone up substantially and is still a joke at $43. The Lanham claim is a desparation last shot that looks awfully pathetic when you consider the companies that think our technology is essential and that includes the US government. If any serious bid is coming our way, then i think we will see it soon. The tier 1 oem's that have not licensed with us would be better off going in together and paying $100+ per share than to pay us per phone over the next 4 years. All this is purely conjecture on my part, but something sure smells rotten in espoopshoot.
My3sons-You wouldn't find a happier person than me if the qcom situation occurred with IDCC,but I just don't see room in the equation for 2 qcom's when consolidation occurs in wireless sector. I am not for a buyout unless it is for a reasonable price and as far fetched as it may seem, I could actually see a buyer swallowing the poison pill or a price close to it, if the right things fall into place. Anyway it sure is getting exciting with some potential to fuel our stock price. Good luck to all longs!
my3sons-On the contrary, I believe we are very attractive to qcom to round out their portfolio or to an opposing consortium of tier 1 manufacturers to oppose qcom's rates. I would expect some sort of offer coming this year, before the stock soars. Prior to LG announcement you could of had me in the $40-60 range, but the only price range I would consider reasonable just doubled from that range. Remember this charade by nok just might be a requirement from another agreement with other company or companies.
If you are nok and are trying to negotiate a best case settlement for your company, what do you have to offer IDCC that would take IDCC off its current position? Nok was dealt a severe blow last week with the announcement of LG contract, at least in its perceived position that nok was in a power position with IDCC.Nok knows it will be triggered for 3g in the coming months,that they will lose an appeal of arb results for 2g,and any attempt to discredit IDCC's technology is falling on deaf ears. It seems that nok's only hope is that someone buys IDCC that has a cross licensing agreement with them, which makes the delay game its only bargaining chip. With nok's stock floundering, its ceo jumping ship for greener pastures,its new leader charged with tax fraud, and tier 2 manufactures gaining market share by the day(not to mention mot kicking their ass),a rational company would looking to cut their losses and move on. The big suit with q is also looming and I would think that having this mess with IDCC unresolved would be another negative for nok.I believe that a negotiated settlement will be the end result, unless a white knight suddenly appears that makes a serious offer- $5 BILLION or more for the company.
Red Angus-Thanks for post-Your conclusion I believe is right on. Maybe someday we will get the answer to the most prevalent question this saga has produced and that came from Judge Pauley-"Why are you here?" After getting the judgement reduced by half and to what amounts to chump change for nok, the finns continue to make a mockery of the legal system. Hopefully, this charade will be exposed and nok will be held accountable for their actions. I doubt that will occur however,and some type of settlement will be forged-and the last of the trigger contracts put to rest.
This is pure speculation on my part, but I've always had a gut feeling that nok's actions towards IDCC were somehow connected to an agreement with another party or parties. Taking this to the wall just doesn't seem rational if for only the benefit of nok. It does make sense however if the actions are required by some indemnification agreement or for the benefit of a suitor to keep the price down for as long as possible and make a low ball bid look reasonable. I am probably way off base here, but these actions seem fishy even for a finn. More than likely the latest appeal is just protocol and lets us know negotiations are not yet complete, but still can't shake that feeling in my gut that there is more to this charade than nok protecting its own ass. jmho-good luck to all longs!
Maria B reporting from Davos on CNBC said money pouring in on tech plays internet and wireless sectors-follow up coming.
Oh Billy, Billy,Billy,Billy! Yes-Been waiting to say this for a long time-EAT A BAG OF **** DMILLER!!!!
IMO-The price drop today signifies the perception of traders that this stock is a predictable event stock where time frames provide safety in their decision making. Nok news still drives this story and after yesterday's run up they feel very confident that no news regarding any settlement is imminent.On the other hand longs should be very confident that a 3g contract is on the way from a major oem-probably nok.The traders will have their way until that event, but I think that event is closer than most think. Hoping for big things in 2006.
Loop-I am totally ignorant of what a PLA contains, so forgive this dumb question. Why would a dispute resolution process be required after a binding arbitration that is confirmed by a judge, whose order should require sales reports by a certain date? Do you think this is a face saving move by IDCC to allow nok to settle the dispute and bury the hatchet? I remember nok's response to IDCC's immediate court action was that we had jumped the gun-did they expect the dispute resolution process to be implemented first? Looks like the court action was an excellent move by IDCC to not only move the process along,but also to limit nok's options. Any further delay by nok to resolve this issue would certainly be viewed by any court as frivolous and possibly contemptuous with the intent to harm rather than deal in good faith. Last question-could this dispute resolution process have been suggested by the judge as a last resort before his final decree or is that not a possibility? Thanks in advance.
Agree with loop on price action. Note that Monday we were up when nas was down in anticipation of possible nok capitulation or immediate decision from judge. When neither occurred, traders placed their bets into an up nas day yesterday and continued today playing the time angle. Reading this play says that no matter what judge says that confirms arb, nok will take as much time as allowed to respond as to their next action. Would love to see something upset this transparency and set the traders on their ass or at least scare them from being so cocksure about their actions.
MTS- Thanks for your time and input. The news that the President of nok was at the hearing, I think, shows that their next move was not set in stone,ie-appeal.Based on the probable favorable ruling for IDCC that seemed to be evident and the ridicule the judge had for nok's approach could not be lost on even the most loyal soldier. Remember Ollila is on his way out-would expect some sort of discussion with IDCC on where the two are headed. Good luck longs!
Badger-I know what our big picture is intended to be and that is why I originally invested in IDCC,but the landscape seems to have changed and entry to the 3g royalties that I foresaw is getting more difficult and prolonged. The big handset manufacturers seem bent on preventing another qcom from occuring even if it is a smaller version. We definitely are at a crossroads here and I think that where we fit in the 3g picture( from the big handset manufacturer's perspective) is as crucial to this investment as our corporate strategy. Wireless is an explosive industry and our technology will play a part, but can we be a stand alone survivor when the inevitable consolidation takes place?
L2V-I totally agree. Nok may be stubborn but not stupid. There is something more to this strategy of delay than is apparent and somehow plays into the bigger picture of where IDCC fits in-at least from Nok's perfect world perspective. They tipped their hand when they went out of their way to point out that the arb was only about 2g-which tells me that their strategy is really aimed at 3g. We have some very good thinkers on this board and instead of spending so much time disecting every word spoken at a conference call or the legalise of contracts and court actions, I would love to see some discussion of the big picture and realistically where a company like IDCC fits in. I think everyone would benefit from some ideas in this realm. I am not criticizing anyone here,just hoping we can get some new ideas and perspective from some very intelligent people. Good luck to all longs!
Gee, if the Korean article is correct and jag rumor re qcom is also correct, we may have what resembles a three team trade at the winter baseball meetings. Nok and Sam agree to send cash and a player to be named later( 3g contract ) to IDCC, and Qcom agrees to purchase IDCC at a price to be named later, in exchange for all litigation being dropped by all parties.
I know some of you don't want to hear this, but this company is made to be bought out and to continue to delude yourself with $100/share fantasies is nothing but a pipe dream. When I bought in, those were my dreams too, but it is clear now that the industry doesn't want another qcom muddling the 3g picture. The first tactic of endless lawsuits to hopefully put us out of business has failed and since the major players can't have our technology for free, we will now see step 2-buyout. This is typical of all major innovations and the evolution of wireless will be no different-face it-consolidation is inevitable.The timing is right for a big player to purchase us and the only question is for how much? This is of course just my opinion and I will also say that I am always wrong on my timing-that's why I never deal in options.
I think we have seen the opening act in the play titled "Consolidation". The timing of Qcom's legal action against nok along with European inquiries into rate structures, seems to be setting the stage for a more ordered process in licensing ipr. Idcc seems to be the pawn in this game and if idcc is the piece that needs to fit for both sides, then last week's rumor of a buyout makes sense. The longer the wait, the higher the price will be, so floating a low ball $30 price before nok and sam are concluded also seems like a good tactic, if the end game of a buyout is a win/win situation for the two biggest players-nok and qcom. This is all of course just speculation, but it seems that a bigger game is going on right now and we are a part of it. Any comments regarding the big picture would be appreciated by this investor.
Quartz-A company can ask for any rate they want but eventually all rates are negotiated and some benchmark is established as to relative value. If attornies for nok use chat boards to make a point, I'm sure they will utilize the rate structure established by arbitration as a refernce point. To me this goes way beyond simply setting a rate for a particular patent-it will pave the way for consolidation in the industry which is sorely needed.
In light of qcom's recent action against nok, wouldn't it benefit nok to drop the appeal and pay what they felt was a lower rate than idcc wanted, thus establishing some sort of benchmark to take on qcom. Questioning binding arbitration only gives fuel to qcom's complaint and paints nok as a defiant, unwilling to negotiate player in the wireless sector. The US economy depends on protecting its technological edge over the rest of the world and with a foreign company trying to put rate caps on that technology and then using it without paying is not going to fly with the courts in this country. I guess a settlement is just too logical for the finn's to handle.
Price action last two days is meaningless-the important fact is that IDCC wins again, validating our technology and leadership with another paying customer. With nok and samsung on the horizon, and a favorable arb decision behind us, I feel better about IDCC than ever before. Our management team knows exactly where it wants to be positioned for the explosion in 3g and has a well thought out plan to get there. Once nok and sam are signed up, this company will be in play big time. Don't let the traders sway you from seeing the big picture and especially don't let the negative neds that frequent this board throw you off track by picking at every bit of minutiae they can drum up.
For whatever it's worth and probably not much, I think the judge has clearly let each side know that they had better settle or both sides could have more problems than they thought. One thing we can be certain of-nothing ever goes the way you think it will with IDCC. Stay tuned and good luck IDCC!
While Wall Street is slow to recognize the powerful position IDCC is in regarding an explosive wireless market, I believe that the industry is well aware of what IDCC has. Once nok,samsung and lu litigation is complete, (and that should be soon)I think we will become very popular in the consolidation speculation that is sure to follow in this industry.The cross licensing concept will be very important to any new big players, and a welcome addition to any of the current market participants. Don't get caught up in the day to day fluctuations and bs-the wireless market is ready for a world wide explosion and IDCC is well situated to reap the benfits.
It seems as though nok is trying to bait IDCC into nullifying the contract to somehow open up an avenue that is not available to them now. Any comments from the legal people on this board would be appreciated as to the strategies available to nok and the likely response from IDCC.