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.
This one's easy. If EZMAC's likely bogus e-mail "from Janet" does not come true, I'll be making a fraud complaint to the SEC.They can easily penetrate phony screen names.
You really are a dumb shit. The losses came from impaired investments.And they have $13 bil in cash, no debt, and 8 figure free cash flow.You can read the big print of headlines, but your comprehension is grade school.
Do you want a second opinion?
+1 is pure high school
Who's opinion did you think Slacker was expressing, if not his own? All posts on this board represent the poster's opinion, unless the opinions or writings of others are identified. In my opinion the MO is obvious and superfluous.
One need only look at the longevity of GSM 2G technology, and the indefinite need for 2G/3G multimode, for historical guidance.
The global recession will slow the rollout of 4G, due to less available capex funds,tuning and refining the complex technology and quality of service will take longer than expected, interoperability testing and the development of supply chains for devices, and all aspects of commercialization will also retard schedules. They always have, and will.LTE will be only found in urban islands, with multi-mode required for roaming and the filling of service voids. Every 3G/4G multi-mode device for decades will require the payment of 3G royalties to IDCC.I think your professor needs to get back to his studies.
it was included in his talking points because any such business would generate additional revenue and profit for IDCC.It is the magnitude of gain from those products that you seem to have unrealistic expectations about,and which company guidance will be necessary to quantify.
Mickey, while all Apple 3G phones currently use the Infineon chip containing the IDCC protocol stack, that may or may not continue as to future models of the iPhone. As for Samsung, only a miniscule number of Samsung phones use a 3G Infineon chip, so the overwhelming majority of Samsung phones provide no chip protocol stack revenue to IDCC.Samsung has given most of its 3G chip business to other companies.
As for the Slimchip, it is not yet a handset chip, rather it has thus far been designed for mobile data modem cards used mainly in computers.Even in that limited market, no design wins for commercial products have been announced.
The substantial progress disclosure appeared intended to defuse harm to the stock that was about to result from Nokia being removed from the approaching ITC trial.While I have no doubt that it was true when made, final/binding agreements only occur when all terms and conditions are reduced to writing, and are executed by the parties. Negotiating with Nokia is negotiating with a moving target. They are masters of stroking and delay. The negotiations obviously stalled when the pressure of an ITC trial was relieved, and won't likely be finalized until shortly before the next trial date,IMHO.Their strategy is to obtain the longest period of forgiveness of past royalties, and to hold onto their cash as long as possible. What's important is that the walls are closing in, and they will ultimately sign.
Actually, nessco, it was 20 million a quarter, 80 million a year.Still, they did it with a straight face.
Around 13 or 14 billion.
Actually, one rumour had Qualcomm getting the chip socket for the rumored iPhone Nano coming out around June, then a more recent rumor had Broadcom with that design win. Too many rumors to know what's happening.Maybe Infineon will keep that business.Often, the customer floats the stories, to get a better price from the current supplier.
Dozer, first let's savor the run.It's been overdue, and well deserved, and there's plenty left. My post to Mickey was purely factual, in case he was using Goldberg's calculator.LOL
Mickey, of the companies on that list, only Apple uses an Infineon 3G chip. RIMM uses a Marvell chip, and HTC mainly uses Qualcomm chips, with EMP getting some of the 3.5G action.
We seem to have forgotten that the $400 mil covers more years of royalties than the 4 year term of the license. Since what year has Samsung not paid us royalties?
3G in 2012 will not be outdated; rather,it will be growing strongly in its HSPA extensions and CDMA revisions, and in multi-mode with both GSM and CDMA voice, as well as newly emerging LTE.Has old GSM been replaced by 3G? There will be a long period (IMO at least a decade) of multi-mode UMTS/LTE and CDMA2000/LTE. The past is prologue to the future.
It's interesting that the analysts get access to management, and even some factors considered during final negotiations, yet we get only a cryptic filing, and no press release.
I would suggest that the recent increase in short interest, and the market reaction to this deal, are interrelated. Expectations run so high around here, coming into each deal, that it becomes unlikely they can be met. Time and again, events like the Ericsson case, the previous Nokia settlement, and this important Tier 1 agreement, breed such unbridled optimism , that the announced deals can never live up to the hype.Traders know how to capitalize on that discrepency between expectency and reality.
IMO, this is a solid deal, for a lot of cash, in a horrible economy, with a Tier 1 giant. Those who insist on trying to guild the lilly, do investors in this stock no favors.
"Considering" 2G "forgiven", after having an arbitration award to the contrary, is a fiction that no one on the street will accept. That also is true for potential 3G licensees, and current licensees seeking renegotiation or extension.
The company release refers to CDMA2000 and WCDMA, not TD-SCDMA. IMO neither TD-SCDMA nor any 4G technologies are licensed.
What about TD-SCDMA? OFDM/OFDMA?
An Asian reporter on CNBC World just announced that China formally issued all three 3G licenses today, to the companies, and for the technologies, that we've been expecting.
Mickey, one more time, I'm going to ask you not to revisit the old IDCC v QCOM board wars of the past. (You, of all people, should recognize how poor your own investment decisions have been in the past, and how your IDCC blinders have not served you well.)The IDCC board is the proper place for you to pump IDCC, not here.Thank you for your anticipated courtesy and cooperation, and Happy/Healthy New Year.
Dozer, the iPhone Nano is only rumour at this time, and Qualcomm as the baseband is likewise "chatter". But the rumour is that the iPhone Nano is a 3G device. Even if all the above is true, that doesn't necessarily mean that Infineon would be replaced in the "regular" 3G iPhone.
In short, too many "ifs" to allow a negative construction as to IDCC.
Mickey, please keep your IDCC pumping on the IDCC board. We all know how to get there when we want to.
Thanks.
3G license with Ericsson would trigger terms for Samsung and Nokia? That's the converse of a Samsung license triggering Ericsson (Sony/Ericsson) terms. If the representation attributed to IR was an assertion by a message board poster, based upon a phone conversation with IR, such "multiple hearsay" is inherently unreliable.What has the company said in PR's, and at publicly broadcast events?
While there is no doubt that a deal has been finalized with Samsung, affording them an election between Option 1 and Option 2, no one can fairly judge how good a bargain was struck, until more information is disclosed. The fact of a settlement is good, but the terms will tell us how good it is.
Other than to rub everyone's face in a horrendous global market, the per share price of QCOM v IDCC is meaningless.Having bragged on the IDCC Board that your "load the boat" IDCC long position (now down $10/sh)consists of a paltry 5,500 shares, even a big shooter like you would know that it is market capitalization, not price per share, that speaks to the relative success of one company compared with another.
Pumpkin, I tip my hat to you. History proved you not only to be right, but truly genius. You stubbornly refused to go long QCOM in the Winter of 1999, before their settlement with Ericsson. Had you done so, you would, even in today's depressed market, have 16 times as many shares, years of dividends,and a cost basis near zero. And then, you were smart enough to load the boat long on IDCC at $33, ride it down to $16, and years later come within a few points of your purchase price. At the same time, you rode a multi-year imaginary short of QCOM from $36 all the way up to $56, and then got bailed out by a global recession and liquidation of markets, refusing to cover at $28, and now getting within $4 of the original trade. Of course, you have accrued several years of interest expense against that trade, as well as lost opportunity, and sleepless nights on Prilosec.
Pumpkin, you really are a talented investor, having made a small fortune. (Of course, you started with a larger fortune.)
(withdrawn)
You have confused two different cases. Yesterday's "contempt" ruling arose from Judge Selna's Injunction concerning two Broadcom patents that were found to have been violated by a jury in Santa Ana. The PR you cite, concerns the ITC finding of a power saving patent that was infringed, that had resulted in an Exclusion Order, that was reversed on appeal as to downstream chip customers.
The chips affected by yesterday's "contempt" finding are no longer made, having been replaced by redesigned, non-infringing products.
Re: quick reality test
IDCC has, by far, the smallest market cap on that list.
No $500 mil settlement amount was previously "announced". Various analysts, journalists, and message board posters wrongly speculated as to the amount.
vg, the $2.3 bil up front money is being paid this quarter as a lump sum, although Nokia is accounting for it by amortizing on a 15 year schedule, quarterly. Additionally, there was a transfer of numerous patents to Qualcomm, and recurring royalties will be paid across all technologies at a new royalty rate.
The $2.29 bil is only the up front money. They are also paying recurring royalties for the next 15 years, across all generations of technology.
$2.3 bil up front, and recurring royalties across all generations of wireless for 15 years. Let's see how that compares with what IDCC gets paid for its portfolio.
Care to provide the company spin on Henry Nicholas III and his pending criminal case? On the options backdating criminal/civil scandal? On the use of hookers and drugs to "buy" business? On misleading product announcements for 3G chips, which in fact represented first tapeouts, rather than commercially stable basebands?On how Broadcom will ever lawfully sell 3G chips without intentionally infringing upon numerous Qualcomm essential patents? On Broadcom's reprehensible corporate culture?
lastchoice, while I am aware of the message board mythology regarding Qualcomm's royalties, well over 100 licensees, after evaluating Qualcomm's patents with the advice of their own experts, negotiated arms length agreements, establishing the commercial value of their portfolio. That's precisely what IDCC is doing. Castigating Qualcomm for the success of their products and intellectual property seems like nothing but envy and sour grapes. You have still, with all due respect, failed to explain a rational basis for the assertion that investments and loyalties in the two companies are inherently in conflict.
I have trouble understanding the assertion by some that somehow InterDigital and Qualcomm are conflicting investments, and require conflicting loyalties. To me, and the analysts I have read, they are not. (Citing the Qualcomm/Samsung foundry relationship is evidence of nothing. That same Samsung has awarded some 3G chip business to Broadcom, who are unlicensed by Qualcomm, and a perpetual thorn in their side.) Relationships in wireless are complex.
Same old stuff from the Chinese government. Keep moving the goal post, while promising technology neutrality and imminent 3G licensing.Billions of global dollars wait on the sidelines to be poured into China, while the Communist authorities dangle a stream of teases to mollify WTO concerns. Same old, same old.
Re: Nokia Siemens
See the PR from yesterday, announcing the settlement. Pursuant to same, Nokia Siemens is also licensed.