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.
There are alot of hurdles here and as I have said all along this is a gamble.
The market has assumed that WDDD will just face the usual corrupt PTAB death squad and its over. However, after my read of the WDDD documents, their expert's views and the transcript of Zyda (Bungie expert), I do feel we have the technical and legal aspects on our side.
Issue then becomes, does the corrupt PTAB simply find a way to wiggle out and kill the patent or follow what should be a finding of validity - that is why we are at 2 cents!
As for the amount, again, I am less asking for opinions based on high level views, I am trying to find the data so we can at least have a good debate on potential value.
I agree on a high level with you, but it would be helpful for all if we stop just talking pie in the sky we 'think' vs looking at actual numbers, facts, dates etc.
I think we should try and steer the discussion back to the original point/questions...lets all dig for the data and see where we get. It seems no one has yet to have that information from the responses so let's all try and get there!
Discussions based on data and factual information are much more helpful for all. As I said to the previous poster, we can all just come up with a number that supports our views, but lets come up with a number that is based on the questions I asked, that people can check, that we can back into based on data.
If anyone wants a good and long read of WDDD's position is read the Declaration of Mark Pesce - WDDD's expert
Highly impressive background and certainly gives some comfort to those of us who are not engineers. Strong defense for the validity of the patents and countering views of why Bugie's views are wrong.
After reading that document in concert with WDDD's arguments to the PTAB, the transcript of Bungie expert Zyda, I do feel like its a 'decent' gamble here.
Again, all moot if PTAB just says "nah, we don't feel like we want these patents to be valid" ...but after reading those documents (very long, involved reads) I feel comfortable that at least we have a very esteemed expert suggesting that the prior art arguments don't hold based on 'technical/coding/engineering reasons'.
All the docs are on the PTAB portal and worth the read over the weekend.
Ok 100 mil per year, vs 100 mil. I see your reasoning on the time delay and it certainly is a factor as is appeal risk as I and others experienced with VRNG. And do you mean "FRAND" when you say RAND? FRAND applies to telcom / infra SEP patents not software. Software rates are based off precedent and as we saw in VRNG V Google software precedents are around 3-6% of Revenue.
That being said how long is the term of the patents? I think given the contract with Bungie wilful is clearly in play = 3x that value
I believe a settlement would need to be much higher for WDDD to capitulate post the PTAB. Right now perhaps they'd take 100 mil
Also, don't forget, legal counsel for the trial is on contingency, there is little cost at that point and if WDDD overcomes the hurdles at the PTAB the stock will undoubedly rise to and through the court case. This would allow them to raise the very little money needed to keep the lights on. Kidrin does not run this company like Perlman at VRNG, he is aligned with us, and has extremely low overhead, something all shareholders should really appreciate.
I recall ATVI lawyers stating billions were at risk in the Markman, so my guess is the numbers would be higher than $100 mil settlement.
The advantage fully swings to WDDD should they clear the PTAB as there is little cost (they don't need the capital markets like VRNG does for instance), thus the drag it out strategy only adds more risk to ATVI for higher damages since they have valid patents, arguments for wilful etc.
100 million is based off what? Your numbers seem very low for a trial.
1. ATVI has made billions (at least on the revenue line) off this technology
2. How many years infringement?
3. What is your royalty rate?
4. What is the term of the patents?
5. What about wilful?
Sorry don't mean to be rude here but just saying $100 mil with no backup is the same as me saying $80 billion- its pointless
The reason I posted my questions for a FACTUAL and DATA driven discussion not more "I just feel like it should be x" discussions
The way we should think about this is as I laid out prior (questions) which lead us to fact based numbers. ATVI revenues, term of patents, life of patents we can claim, fair royalty rates if patents haven't expired etc. That leads us to then discount those values based on, time, negotiation, appeal risk etc.
I don't disagree with your commentary on all the risk, 100% aligned with that, but my point is I am trying to understand what is a realistic scenario on court awarded damages if we get through the PTAB as I mentioned in the prior post.
I can guarantee, the value is much greater than $100 mil if so, but part of getting to that realistic value is the diligence I suggested prior.
That being said, I would be happy to see your responses and how you backed into that value (what revenues, term, royalty, etc) you used) to assess their validity. Certainly, if that value is based on the type of diligence I mentioned it would be helpful to the conversation. If not, well its not really based in anything other than a guess, and that wasn't the purpose of my post!
Curious to hear people's view on value should we survive the PTAB. That is a HUGE 'if' but let's suspend reality for a moment!
I had read a few years back, extremely large damage awards from ATVI and others on this, but am aware that there were some changes in the Markman to how far back WDDD could claim for damages (which now has skipped my mind)...
So questions are:
1. How many years of infringement are at play here with ATVI?
2. Has anyone done the math on the revenues and a fair damage number for past damages? Royalties (go forward - when to the patents expire if they have not?) are typically anywhere from 3-6% in the software space.
3. I would think given the issues of Bungie, what we've read in the contract, etc, there could be a case for wilful as well.
So adding all that up, what are people's views on the three questions above and has anyone run some numbers based off real ATVI revenues?
Would be a good discussion to have here!
I'll believe there is change when I see it, but that article I posted seems a 180 degree swing in her past views.
I agree it was Google/Obama
Very simply math
1. Google and Obama are buddies we know that, we know Schmidt had weekly meetings with him, perhaps we'll see Obama get a board position in a few years (keep your eye on that, wouldn't doubt it).
2. We all know the USA is an oligarchy now, corporations run our government, this is why you see (although extreme sides of the political spectrum) both Bernie Sanders and Trump winning hearts of voters. Everyone can see who's running our government and those 2 are capitalizing on that corruption.
3. As we all know, the government doesn't write most of the laws that go into congress for vote, its usually corporate lawyers doing it for them, thus sneaking in all the stuff they want. Congress paid for and bought by those same companies glosses over it, takes their word for how great these new laws are and votes it in.
4. The AIA was written by corporate interests, to serve their interests, which is the institutionalization of IP theft. It scared congress with the 'narrative of the patent troll' and threat to innovation, when in reality, it was large companies wanting a route to kill patents and IP they have stolen. Data never supported this huge threat of a patent troll yet it was all over the media, distracting from the reality. The anti-patent lobby did a very good job selling it. The AIA created this death squad of the PTAB, and then put a Google employee (who probably helped write the damn thing) in charge. Funny how its so obvious to see the linkages yet so many ignore it.
Anyone with 1/2 a brain can see what was done here. Now that SCOTUS has taken notice...seems some are starting to fear what happens if they keep digging.
Of course our country is corrupt, its getting worse than a 3rd world country as it has become enshrined in legal statutes....
Oral hearings are in April. The ruling is expected in June
Oral hearings are not= to a ruling!
http://www.aiablog.com/post-grant-proceedings/high-court-accepts-first-aia-case-could-rule-by-june-2016/
Hey I hope you're right but I disagree that the price will rise soon, I think we flounder here until we see a ruling on Cuozzo and see whether there is any benefit or not to WDDD
Regardless, all this focus on the PTAB and 'issues' may help reel them in a bit and thus may help WDDD but it could also have no bearing...just wait and hope we're in the right given the legal arguments and the law is applied fairly and justly!
Tradetrack, I could be wrong but I believe that area you mentioned is one of the two aspects of the Cuozzo / SCOTUS review so I can see why so many dissented.
I suspect that will be addressed by SCOTUS and indeed it being ignored may be the PTAB trying not to acknowledge something is wrong. If SCOTUS changes things they can point to that as the reason vs. admitting wrongdoing.
Not sure about that, alot of shares out there, this isn't thinly held and time will tell if there are many buyers.
Cuozzo isn't this month btw - expected ruling is in june
Nicklaus,
Without a catalyst the share price won't go up. Not sure how you assume that the price goes up from here without one!
Thanks for posting.
Doesn't appear to be much here specifically helping us but anything that gets the PTAB trying to level the playing field should help us.
Moreover, interesting article by Gene Quinn and surprising commentary by Michelle Lee.
I guess when you no longer know who your boss is going to be (obama) you better start playing the game fairly as you wouldn't want the FBI digging into your organization!
Let's hope all this shift back to patent protections and what appears to be recognition that the game has shifted too far in favor of those infringing, actually translates into helping us!
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/03/31/lee-delivers-pro-patent-speech-mit/id=67719/
I don't have access, used up my free trial years ago...but anything bolstering review for patent holders has to be a benefit to WDDD and any patent owner in general, given the behavior we've seen in the past from PTAB reviews!
Timing is helpful as well!
Hopefully someone can post the full article - good find!
WDDD has yet to establish itself (ie validity, earnings etc) and as such would not be able to finance itself without diluting, most I would think understand that process.
Indeed, all speculative stocks finance themselves this way, this is not a surprise to anyone other than those who are inexperienced investors or traders. Worrying about dilution at this stage really is focusing on the wrong issues, but it seems some here haven't had much experience in the markets and / or speculative companies.
Moreover, I think it is actually a good sign that someone is willing to finance this company at this stage given the risk, that's actually a positive.
Also, please look up promissory note vs convertible debt, they are very different instruments. As mentioned, a promissory note would typically have warrant attached (for a company at this stage of its evolution).
There is a material difference between convertible debt and a promissory note + a warrant as I explained prior!
Good luck with your research!
Spin what? WDDD is basically a call option I have said it 1000+ times....And sadly, I didn't make up the definition of a promissory note, so its not 'spin' - its FACT...LOL
I was responding to the post on the WDDD PR suggesting a promissory note is dilutive, so I helped the board understand it is not. The 10k is a different issue altogether, let's try and keep the focus on the topic at hand!
That being said, the issue is moot since we experienced investors and traders don't analyze a company like this like it's AAPL
Anyone who's in this stock is aware, its event driven, it will rely on the outcome of this case to determine if its worth anything or zero (ie call option)
Understanding how to analyze a company is as important as understanding what tools to use to do so.
Inexperienced investors often make this error, thinking you analyze all companies the same way, this leads to bad investment decisions!
Glad to be of help in your learning process! Keep at it!
Total POS company adding to the short position slowly
The WDDD PR mentioned says "several promissory notes"
For those learning to invest, the two forms of financing a company are debt and equity!
Equity involves dilution, debt does not. There are hybrids of course (convertible debt etc)
Here is a definition of 'promissory note'
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissorynote.asp
A financial instrument that contains a written promise by one party to pay another party a definite sum of money either on demand or at a specified future date. A promissory note typically contains all the terms pertaining to the indebtedness by the issuer or maker to the note's payee, such as the amount, interest rate, maturity date, date and place of issuance, and issuer's signature.
Alas, a 'note' typically signals a debt instrument! Certainly, in this case, there could be potential dilution via a convertible instrument, warrants, etc given the lack of income but until we see the documents we cannot be certain. Moreover, should this case move to court, any minimal dilution (assuming a convert option, which typically would not be part of a note) will not matter. Any dilution here would likely not come from a convert but rather warrants, and with warrants, the company receives cash.
Add to that, most of those who have invested here are not concerned about dilution at this point its a small issue given this is really just a call option.
These are some basics to help all those learning to invest, learning to analyze companies etc. Its important to look at all facts and understand if they are really relevant or not!
Glad I can continue to be of help to those learning the basics of investing!
SCOTUS only takes cases it feels there is a genuine legal issue at hand that they need to address.
I'd be curious to see how many cases they have taken over time that remained status quo vs seeing some change.
That stat would be quite insightful I think
Just trying to help - call it my good deed for the day. I love helping those in need!
1.https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freudian-sip/201102/how-find-the-best-therapist-you
2. https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/find-colleges/college-101/quick-guide-your-college-degree-options
3. http://www.drphil.com/articles/article/606
4. http://www.oprah.com/spirit/5-Ways-to-Get-a-Life
This stock is junk short the crap out of it folks! I've made bank on this.
Paid off my house with it now reloading my short position. Shorting this to zero
Seems no one wants to sell at 2 cents only 3 cents
2k traded, bid at 2 cents, ask at 3!
:)
Whoopsie, sorry for teasing with a banana!
I am not sure, is the internet on?
Great article by Gene Quinn on the topic of the PTAB/Cuozzo/Procedural and legal fairness
Much aligns with what I have said about the PTAB today and in the past, how the market is reacting etc.
The market tends to 'get it'...It sees corruption and while Gene is hesitant to use those words, he alludes to it.
http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/03/29/examination-patents-not-presumed-valid/id=67556/
Support is more like 0.02 - going close to zero IMHO
Short and strong! Made 250k so far, reloading here
RVLT is worthless. I have made over $250k shorting it, expect it to go to zero.
Sell this stock, short it, not worth anything IMHO
So
1. Expert Testimony doesn't hold
2. Bungie is a proxy given the contract and should be time barred
3. Legal arguments in favor of WDDD
and Share price is down lol....I guess the market assumes as I said prior that the PTAB is as corrupt as it comes.
Indeed, as you said, read Lee's response to Cuozzo - She basically says "my view since its been paid for and bought by google (my old employer) and its cronies" is:
A. The PTAB and administrative arm should be allowed free reign to decide what constitutionally protected legal property should be reviewed - one of the most preposterous ideas ever suggested if you understand the separation of powers, law and the constitution
B. We should have little regard for how the legal system interprets things and get to make up our own rules
C. This is so we can effectively skirt the legal system because that's the way google's lawyers wrote up the America Invents Act then fed it to Congress (and don't for a second think that's not how it works) - such that they can find all the ways around the law and not let the law review what we are doing
D. Thus we can allow big tech to steal IP under the guise of pseudo legal rules and there is no way to stop us
= LEGALIZED THEFT = Efficient Infringement
Market is basically saying we get it, and PTAB is corrupt
As even Mr. Bernie is saying, our system is set up now as an oligarchy. Law, fairness is gone in favor of the elites and corporations .
When I read Lee's response, understand where she came from (google), where google's views align with the AIA, and accept the reality that corporations are often the one's helping gov't write new laws, there is not an ounce of doubt in my mind that this group is an extension of certain corporations that have lobbied the gov't and basically have their employees killing IP at their whim so they don't have to pay for it.
One day in about 40 years someone will do a documentary on this and this generation, and how much institutionalized corruption was prevalent and part of the destruction of America's position in the world.
Sorry, I have just been playing with the monkeys, I'll stop teasing them with bananas!
;)
Are you referring to Lee's response in Cuozzo? Is it posted?
Making bank shorting this pig!
I see 0.0001 soon!
This is going to zero!
Yes I saw this when I read the transcript and arguments.
So how does their expert have a view on whether Bungie/ATVI infringes or not if he hasn't read the patent?
Funny that all the odds legally are stacked in our favor but the the price is still at 2 cents, the market is just assuming law means little to the PTAB.
You forgot his mother is going to take the company private for $4 dollars TOTAL
She is going to get $21-25 million in cash for $4 bucks from what I hear...
you hearing the same?
This is a 2 -3 cent stock with a 2 mil market cap
How many more times are you going to repeat yourself? We've heard your view, its wrong live with it
I love facts! I have bolded above 3 cents to help those unsure of what the support is really here....use the link to go further back in time, it will only show higher values.
Facts are great for helping investors make sound decisions and to back up one's opinions! If the facts aren't aligned with an opinion, it can help one realize that one's views may be incorrect!
As one can see below, since Dec 15th there have only been about 10-11 trading days below 3 cents, most of which have come in the last couple of weeks! While 'support' has been broken, a new support level has not been 'established'. Most experienced traders understand volume and time below a trend line determine if that trend line has established a new line or is temporary
Only time and volume can 'confirm' that. I see some here are still learning the basics of this! Sorry for being right on this, I will stop responding as I have posted factual information / data back up many times on this topic!
Moreover, it is only a 2 mil company, and really is priced like a call option at this stage, worrying about support is really quite silly as one other poster has mentioned numerous times, I am not quite sure why this is raised so frequently? Why is there a need to constantly provide this same data that proves my point? I digress!
Good luck to all new investors!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=WDDD+Historical+Prices
Mar 22, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 523,000 0.02
Mar 21, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 365,700 0.02
Mar 18, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 400,700 0.02
Mar 17, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 683,900 0.02
Mar 16, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 758,000 0.02
Mar 15, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 545,100 0.03
Mar 14, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 936,700 0.02
Mar 11, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 611,700 0.02
Mar 10, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 1,171,700 0.02
Mar 9, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 791,200 0.02
Mar 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 973,600 0.03
Mar 7, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 580,200 0.03
Mar 4, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 972,600 0.03
Mar 3, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 684,800 0.03
Mar 2, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 758,700 0.03
Mar 1, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 939,500 0.03
Feb 29, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,188,600 0.03
Feb 26, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 822,200 0.02
Feb 25, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 543,300 0.03
Feb 24, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 604,900 0.03
Feb 23, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 319,400 0.02
Feb 22, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 310,400 0.02
Feb 19, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 516,900 0.03
Feb 18, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 499,900 0.03
Feb 17, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 104,500 0.03
Feb 16, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 43,600 0.03
Feb 12, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 38,500 0.03
Feb 11, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 355,100 0.03
Feb 10, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 89,000 0.03
Feb 9, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 134,600 0.03
Feb 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 49,400 0.03
Feb 5, 2016 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 44,900 0.03
Feb 4, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 25,500 0.03
Feb 3, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 96,500 0.03
Feb 2, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 74,300 0.03
Feb 1, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 4,200 0.04
Jan 29, 2016 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 33,800 0.04
Jan 28, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 161,500 0.04
Jan 27, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 65,700 0.03
Jan 26, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 68,000 0.03
Jan 25, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0 0.03
Jan 22, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 33,500 0.03
Jan 21, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 74,100 0.03
Jan 20, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 46,000 0.03
Jan 19, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 57,400 0.03
Jan 15, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 41,500 0.03
Jan 14, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 113,000 0.03
Jan 13, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0 0.03
Jan 12, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 146,100 0.03
Jan 11, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 76,800 0.03
Jan 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 35,000 0.03
Jan 7, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 23,700 0.03
Jan 6, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 184,800 0.03
Jan 5, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 27,000 0.03
Jan 4, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 120,000 0.03
Dec 31, 2015 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 220,200 0.03
Dec 30, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 1,057,900 0.02
Dec 29, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,571,800 0.03
Dec 28, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 758,600 0.03
Dec 24, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 546,000 0.03
Dec 23, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,048,700 0.03
Dec 22, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 801,100 0.03
Dec 21, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 916,500 0.04
Dec 18, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 759,700 0.03
Dec 17, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 359,100 0.04
Dec 16, 2015 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 145,100 0.04
Here's the factual data on WDDD! So I guess it must be on topic since the data is WDDD share history right?
Check the data for support levels :) Again volume matters too!
Facts are always important when investing!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=WDDD+Historical+Prices
Mar 22, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 523,000 0.02
Mar 21, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 365,700 0.02
Mar 18, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 400,700 0.02
Mar 17, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 683,900 0.02
Mar 16, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 758,000 0.02
Mar 15, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 545,100 0.03
Mar 14, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 936,700 0.02
Mar 11, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 611,700 0.02
Mar 10, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 1,171,700 0.02
Mar 9, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 791,200 0.02
Mar 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 973,600 0.03
Mar 7, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 580,200 0.03
Mar 4, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 972,600 0.03
Mar 3, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 684,800 0.03
Mar 2, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 758,700 0.03
Mar 1, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 939,500 0.03
Feb 29, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 1,188,600 0.03
Feb 26, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 822,200 0.02
Feb 25, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 543,300 0.03
Feb 24, 2016 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 604,900 0.03
Feb 23, 2016 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 319,400 0.02
Feb 22, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 310,400 0.02
Feb 19, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 516,900 0.03
Feb 18, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 499,900 0.03
Feb 17, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 104,500 0.03
Feb 16, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 43,600 0.03
Feb 12, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 38,500 0.03
Feb 11, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 355,100 0.03
Feb 10, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 89,000 0.03
Feb 9, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 134,600 0.03
Feb 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 49,400 0.03
Feb 5, 2016 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 44,900 0.03
Feb 4, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 25,500 0.03
Feb 3, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 96,500 0.03
Feb 2, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 74,300 0.03
Feb 1, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 4,200 0.04
Jan 29, 2016 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 33,800 0.04
Jan 28, 2016 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 161,500 0.04
Jan 27, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 65,700 0.03
Jan 26, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 68,000 0.03
Jan 25, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0 0.03
Jan 22, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 33,500 0.03
Jan 21, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 74,100 0.03
Jan 20, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 46,000 0.03
Jan 19, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 57,400 0.03
Jan 15, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 41,500 0.03
Jan 14, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 113,000 0.03
Jan 13, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0 0.03
Jan 12, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 146,100 0.03
Jan 11, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 76,800 0.03
Jan 8, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 35,000 0.03
Jan 7, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 23,700 0.03
Jan 6, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 184,800 0.03
Jan 5, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 27,000 0.03
Jan 4, 2016 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 120,000 0.03
Dec 31, 2015 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 220,200 0.03
Dec 30, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 1,057,900 0.02
Dec 29, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,571,800 0.03
Dec 28, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 758,600 0.03
Dec 24, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 546,000 0.03
Dec 23, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 1,048,700 0.03
Dec 22, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 801,100 0.03
Dec 21, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 916,500 0.04
Dec 18, 2015 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 759,700 0.03
Dec 17, 2015 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 359,100 0.04
Dec 16, 2015 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 145,100 0.04
VHC won't get an injunction it is pure grandstanding
Here are the qualifiers for granting one:
1. That there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case
2. That they face a substantial threat of irreparable damage or injury if the injunction is not granted
3. The threat is immediate
4. That the balance of harms weighs in favor of the party seeking the preliminary injunction,
5. There is no other available remedy,
6. That the grant of an injunction would serve the public interest.
Now the key in the USA is number 2 - irreparable harm. In order to substantiate this, the plaintiff needs to be a competitor/ producing the same products, and thus the defendant by using the IP, is preventing sales/gain of market share of the plaintiff. As it states the defendant must be facing substantial threat of immediate damage.
Since NPE's don't sell anything this hurdle is never met, since there is no damage to their 'business' that cannot be met with a financial remedy (which is what the process is determining).
NPE's in the USA DO NOT get injunctions
yes but VHC doesn't meet the hurdle of getting an injunction / ie they need to show they would be monetarily harmed by the competition.
Since they don't sell anything / are an NPE, they will not be granted one - pure grandstanding
yes that is why the stock has come off.
many of us explained this prior and in fact at the ruling aapl said they would appeal
Yes felt the same way about it, but then realized the person who mentioned this was in last year's proxy was correct, then dig some digging. There really is no need at this stage so I don't think its anything really being seriously considered in the near term, but rather something they want to have in place 'in case they need it'.
As for the share price, the market is basically saying they think the PTAB will kill the patents, there is no value being attributed here other than a small premium for an outside shot = call option with alot of time left...
No view on price...nothing matters here until we see what SCOTUS does with Cuozzo and if there is any implication here, and in reality all that matters is the PTAB ruling.
They had this in their past proxy and have just asked for authorization again should they want to do it in the future.
As a previous poster mentioned, they need to ask for such things on an annual basis if they want to proceed this next year.
I believe in the past they wanted this in such that should they proceed into the atvi case in the courts, the could then list on nasdaq to get more attention around the name, help attract institutions etc.
My guess is Kidrin, given his awareness of corporate governance and looking out for shareholders would not undertake this unless there is an advantage (ie get the price high enough to list on nasdaq IF and only IF there is a valid reason - ie they are in court w ATVI).
Correct, and nothing really 'new or unexpected' in here.
Indeed, when I see a CEO taking a pay cut year over year to save funds, a very small support team (CFO who seems to be on a small/ diminimus contract), I appreciate it. VRNG and Andrew Perlscam could take a lesson from Kidrin.
Hopefully should SCOTUS agree w Cuozzo, we get a slight bump in the share price, as all in this industry should depending on the details of the ruling.
That is is expected around the time of the Annual Meeting for WDDD.