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.
sorry, JimLur Absolutely didn't mean to insult Tom Carpenter. Just thought he might have afforded an opinion based on what he knew so far. although I will have to say the last two guys on the conference calls--the ones trying to pin B.M. down on legal fees did not show much insight. I think I'll just go back to lurking and reading again
So what has tom Carpenter said or written since the ALJ?
He didn't seem any more knowledgeable on the conference call than the posters on this board who share their hopes and concerns everyday.
robj
Would not the inverse of Merrit's quarterly conference call statement also be true?
"A win would also likely motivate the remaining unlicensed parties to take a license with us, hopefully, without extended litigation."
Inspire (ISPH) up 12% with no news showing on Yahoo. Maybe a new CEO is leaking there--I'd like to see that bleed over to INSV, eh?
at the risk of my3s biting my ankle again, I'm going to try another post.
I think Nokia will hold pat without negotiating until they see whether the commission will revue the ALJ decision. Until then, there is no risk to them to stay away from the negoitating table.
Scenario 1: Commission agrees to review, Nokia dips their toe in the negotiating waters but threatens to appeal the validity/enforceability of IDCCs patents. At least negotiations start.
Scenario 2: Nokia pushes IDCC all the way to the next legal decision
Just so it can stay in perspective. IDCC is not without risk in taking the next step to the Commssion and then Federal Court.
Nokia may also at the same time muddy the waters further by appealing to the commission Luckern's determination of validity and enforceability of IDCCs four patents.
While the risk/reward may favor IDCC continuing with various appeals, it is not risk-free--and as we've seen in MOT and Nokia when it gets to nut-cuttin' time IDCC doesn't fare well.
excellent Rainmaker
Rainmaker, I read the following post about INSV. Just wondered where yu agreed and disagreed with it:
"Only news will be on International Sales to take the stock higher, or for an outright sale of INSV. With about $10MM yearly royalty revenue projected for Azasite, and no development for Azasite+ without a partner, and Besivance possibly slowing Azasite sales growth; this puppy is going nowhere. Market Cap at $.40 = $70MM when you include debt, so INSV is selling at 7X Cash FLow from Royalties."
He sounds just as confident going forward as he did when they first filed against Nokia--there might be a lesson in that.
i hear lots about "new" patents, but don't you think IDCC will have a longer slog to license those--and likely have to go to ITC again to get new patents enforced.
speaking of 2 cents worth as Tom Carpenter release anything anywhere. Has Heartland?
I still have my bid in for shares a bit lower than today, but unlikely to ever get them
So now they pre-announce a 3rdQ revenue shortfall.
well thought-out post, Rainmaker.
Maybe I'll be known as a reformed trader after holding INSV, but i can't get totally away from the trader's mentality of momentum.
What would you say are the near-term (trader, remember?) momentum events ahead of INSV and or their partners. A big one I'm sure would be a name-brand CEO.
The combo product at another step forward would be good, but I wonder if the much smaller market for those products will be discounted by investors pretty quickly. It's for this reason partially that I wonder if a buyout now with the combo product still in the future but not yet discounted would be our best option instead another alliance
Agree that INSV lost institutional buyers/holders when they went to OTCBB
If I'm wrong, tell me, but it seems INSV is noticeably different from most biotech in that #1 they've already licensed an FDA-approved product and the threat of further share dilution is minimal--the caveat obviously would be if INSV decides to be an acquirer instead of being acquired--perish the thought for me.
thanks, rain
okay Rainmaker, granted it's older, but not ancient.
Did anything fundamentally change from that report of $5 per share until today. Obviously INSV is still unnoticed probably right now to be blamed on the OTCBB. C'mon Nasdaq. lol
Do you agree with that report and care to share your target price? I might decide to make my prior purchases at $.38 a keeper instead of a trader for 30% profit like I do with most biotechs.
nicmar, I know not that many here like your views, but I completely agree with this post of yours below:
"Nobody likes it, but I just don't see how idcc has any other choice but to do the appeals and if unsuccessful, then go to Deleware or whatever other legal option they may have. Idcc can't walk away from this and I don't think Idcc can accept a 5 or 10 cent deal. This one is going to continue on, I believe."
I, too, believe Nokia's previous offer was am unacceptable lowball. And that next week, they will pull even that as a test of IDCC's will. Nokia wants to see if IDCC is going to blink and start up negotiations again--when Nokia will undoubtedly try and take IDCC to the woodshed OR will IDCC tell Nokia that the next stop is the commission and then if needed Federal Court.
If I'm Nokia, I publish my previous offer if there was one that wasn't a horrible lowball--how do you think IDCC shareholders would react if IDCC just pissed away a $200M+ offer, and wouldn't that put pressure on IDCC to settle for anything approaching $100M now (Obviously Nokia would want some vigorish after IDCC lost with the ALJ)
Overall, I completely agree, that for now it's a choice between IDCC accepting something horrible that would ameoba-like manifest itself into undesirable settlements with future licensees OR go all-in at the commission/court.
okay bim, but right now those that would claim they are using Nokia's work and not IDCCs have the most recent precedent ruling on their side with the ALJ. A win on appeal by IDCC would change that however, but a loss on an appeal would only sink that hook in deeper against IDCC. Hate to say but the posters who think IDCC will now trade at a narrow range at a significantly lower level until Dec. 14 are probably right. And many posters here will continue to be either hopelessly hopeful.
Mickey, you said:
"How many of you if you was unlicensed with IDCC would think that the ITC decision made you absolved from paying IDCC."
I just don't think the other unlicensed companies are as fearful as you hope. I remind you that if you shit in one hand and hope in the other, it is obvious which one fills up first.
I think the other unlicensed companies have just been given carte blanche to tell IDCC and/or the ITC court/Commission that "we are using Nokia's work and not IDCCs" That way they pay only Nokia and not both companies.
That said i put an order in on Monday for my first IDCC buy in 6 or 7 years. robj
Hi Rainmaker,
As more of a trader than investor I would rather INSV be acquired rather than issue shares to be a buyer. I don't think the company has the cash to buy a real player anywhere and that INSV by itself is enough of a crapshoot without adding another OTCBB company.
PS. I'd prefer the Nasdaq as a biotech company over the Amex anyway, so what's to keep them from applying? Their market cap?
I wonder now about other manufacturers who were using what they once thought was IDCCs technology through Nokia products and therefore were paying IDCC--I wonder if now they won't owe IDCC anything if it's related to the 4 patents in the ITC ruling
I would think INSVs market cap would be close to qualifying for listing on Nasdaq. Any thoughts?
Has Tom Carpenter weighed in anyplace or with anybody. JimLur?
sorry romuluss, I also focus on the word over-estimating as the key word but with a different connotation than you make of it.
I liken it to "over-estimate" used in the following situations:
1) A boss who tells an employee that he over-estimates his importance to the company. (There is but one conclusion in this scenario)
2) A professional sports team owner who tells a player that he over-estimates his importance to the team. (again only one end result--think T.O.)
I think this time over-estimate is code for the other big players to give IDCC credit for little to no value at all, and I agree with the poster who said Nokia was out to smash IDCC from the beginning and that's why there was no settlement at what would have been a gift rate had Nokia lost.
I don't know why I think I should post here--I haven't owned a share for 6-7 years. I guess it's that I hate to see so many good people get reemed And there's something really wrong when the collective thinking that this board brings to bear proves wrong.
I can only be left to blame management--either for their laissez faire attitude about the success they expected against MOT and Nokia or more problematic an intentional misleading of investors.
I also agree with the poster that says all options and bonuses should be withheld for the forseeable future. Performance bonuses and options would really rankle now. I forgot, is the annual meeting over?
best,
robj
I'm sorry but I view Nokia's PR as much more onerous than some here:
"We believe this initial determination by the ITC combined with earlier UK court decisions provide a strong indication that the asserted value of InterDigital's 3G patent portfolio may have been over-estimated."
I think Nokia is not suggesting at all that they want to negotiate with IDCC rather that the little guy isn't going to be a player in the big boys' games. IDCC may continue to be issued patent after patent, but in the two major cases which have gone to decision (MOT & NOK) IDCC has lost badly in trying to get paid for them. Samsung may be kicking their own ass right now.
I'm afraid Nokia is now telling everybody that IDCC does not have the goods so don't be in any hurry at all to sign or re-sign for 2G or 3G. And don't even think of paying IDCC a living wage for 4G or LTE.
If the big boys band together even more seriously than before against IDCC, I don't see a driver for increasing revenues--and as licenses expire a liklier series of declining quarter over quarter revs.
Nokia's press release was indeed arrogant and I think is trying to lay out a playbook for others to balk at paying IDCC.
"We believe this initial determination by the ITC combined with earlier UK court decisions provide a strong indication that the asserted value of InterDigital's 3G patent portfolio may have been over-estimated."
It may take somebody smarter than Janet to counter that statement when IDCC puts their spin on this news.
I thought people on this board thought the UK decision was favorable to IDCC. Mokia's not having any of that apparently.
long ago owner of IDC (robj on Raging Bull) This company is always stepping on its on dick whether its over-confidence in Motorola or in Nokia here. How much should anything reeking of confidence from management be discounted before acting upon it as an investor. Too many good folks here too long being bent over too often. robj
thanks Rainmaker, I had seen something about Nittles and Canada, but was confused when I still saw your sticky note with a posting of June 3, 2009. Sorry to seem a rube on that.
Rainmaker, in one of your stickies you talk about some countries that Inspire is waiting on approval for AzaSite:
"AzaSite is marketed by Inspire Pharmaceuticals in the United States and will be marketed by international partners in Japan, South Korea, four countries in South America, Turkey and China upon approval in those countries."
do you have any feel for a timeline--especially Japan, S.K. and China?
New buyer here at $.38 and appreciate your posts on IHUB. Are you on Yahoo, too?
I sure hope this court case doesn't hurt the value of my ADZR shares. lol
These people suing Cardona I guess were the "acredited investors" of press releases. Apparently accredited meant someone who would believe our f ucking lies more than the average mooks buying our common shares. I wonder if Charles will use as his defense "I'd like to tell the court what we were up to but General Weaver promised the government we would keep it secret."
I think this bk trial might shed more light on ADZRs bullsh!t than all the PRs that were issued put together. robj (dogwoodadman on Yahoo board)
as to be expected. Bid now only $.095 heading back to $.08 resulting in about a 40%+ haircut to buyers yesterday. Scammy mothers
would be interested to know if any average shareholders have been able to sell into this run. I'm wondering if this rise isn't for the bitter bros. newest shares--there's a history
why is it that during every rise in price with AENP I get the feeling somebody is being bent over
yeah, ponzi, I know.
but I'm thinking there is a difference between the company and the share price. I mean, hell, with all the debt before today's announcement, they weren't even worth 7 cents, ou think?
I think the mean Nokia bastards are about the only ones who could hold the Chineses' feet in the fire for royalties. If I'm IDCC, I don't relish a fight with the Chinese over IPR. Being paid by Nokia instead of China seems a much better plan
I think Nokia will be bigger and have a better path into China than any other competitor given Finland's long-standing connection with and proximity to Russia. I think that logic works. If it does, than an equitable settlement with Nokia will likely give IDCC its own more greased entrance into China.
grandis, i call extreme bullshit on your email claim.
wonder how many stuck bagholders added to already underwater positions on this scammy run above $.10? Oh, contractor? did you buy more, dude?
so nobody responded to the post asking whether anybody had tried to sell a larger block right now (say 10,000 shares) I'll be you can't get it to go through. Would welcome anybody to say yea or nay about this.
okay, i owned way back when it was IDC on the AMEX and came real close to a grandslam on 110 contracts of $5 calls that expired about 2.5 months before stock zoomed to $82.00. Now you can leverage about 10% cash and buy Sept $25 calls for $3.30 but I hesitate because of the awfulness that ensued after the Motorola decision. I'm going to ask "what's the worst result of the ALJ hearing, and can it be another Motorola-type p.o.s? Wouldn't mind being able to control 3000 shares for less than $10K, but would hate another disaster. Thoughts? robj (dogwoodadman on old Yahoo board)
Agreed Revlis, but the exchanges are littered with companies that AUTHORIZED a buyback but failed to do it. Didn't thrill new investors that much as indicated by current share price. Whether right or wrong a stock split announcement is seen by investors as a signal of strength and a prod to buy the stock before the ex-dividend date. Blame Wade B. cook or whoever you want, but that's the game, imo