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.
Jim: In the free market system, no business outcome is a sure thing. However, after following this situation for years, I believe that Ericy being a trigger is about as close to being a sure thing as I've experienced.
Jiff; my take on that is that the judge was asking whether the settlement documents would have an impact on a third party. When Idcc said no, it was because they were convinced the 1999 contract with Nok definitively established that Ericy was a trigger and that whatever rates Ericy paid would be the rates that Nok would pay, regardless of what was in the documents. They felt it was a cut and dried issue.
Idcc has crossed above its 200 day moving average. Institutions may take note of this and turn up the volume a bit.
Twelvebees; Nok, Ericy, and other OEM's have certain interests in both competing and in cooperating with each other. Nok has not made a secret of its aim to cap royalty rates. I doubt that Ericy and other OEM's would object to this. In a market where margins are small, even a saving of half of one per cent by withholding royalty payments is meaningful. Ericy would love to pay zero for 3G and definitely does not not want to pay while its competitor, Nok, gets away free. Ericy is probably hoping that Idcc loses the Nok arbitration and is not considered a trigger. This would give Ericy a good excuse to never pay for 3G. However, even if Idcc wins, Ericy will remember that they resisted paying Idcc for 2G for over a decade, even when their own engineers recommended that they should pay, and in the end, they actually did pretty well for themselves. Who knows whether they might feel emboldened to try the same thing for 3G, especially if they do not see much of a downside.
Perhaps the biggest downside in the Ericy settlement was the failure to include a 3G licence. We expect this will be rectified after the conclusion of the Nok arbitration. Any satisfying settlement with Nok prior to a panel decision would have to include a 3G licence. Otherwise it would discourage Nok and other potential 3G licencees from signing with us. Even a good settlement or favorable panel decision in the Nok case would be only a successful skirmish rather than an all out victory in the real battle,which is to to get paid for 3G.
Idcc is poised to cross above its 200 day moving average. This would probably give the stock another boost just as crossing above the 50 day moving average gave it recently. The shorts would rather not see this happen.
IDCC crossed above its 30 day moving average today. EOM
Loop: As you remember, Corpgold used to maintain vigorously that 3G would not be like 2G. He felt certain that IDCC, supported by standards boards, would be paid by EOM's using our essential IPR. He seemed very knowledgable from a technical as well as a business point of view. He convinced me at that time and I'm still here now, albeit a little less assured than I was then.
The decision of management to buy 1,000,000 shares of Idcc for the company with company money is mildly interesting. If management decided to buy 10,000 shares for themselves with their own money it would be very interesting.
Ron: The reason that the board will not heed your suggestions is that if the payments were made in cash, the compensation would appear outlandish. The use of RSU's or options obscures the total compensation in the minds of the public.
I believe that Idcc management is confident of a favorable outcome from the Nok arbitration because ,if they weren't, they would have initiated 3G infringement suits against designated OEM's besides LU by now and they would not be spending these multimillions of dollars on a buyback but instead saving the cash for use in 3G lawsuits.
Also, you hit them with your strength. You hit them with a bat rather than a toothpick. I guess we are keeping the bat in the rack until after the Nok arbitration. Personally I would like to see it used now. I suspect we'll have to use it sooner or later anyway.
GHORS; GREAT NEWS! In the highly unlikely event that things don't go well for us in the Nok arb, we will still have a second shot for a significant win about 6 months from the release of the panel's decision. Also it doubles the chance of a settlement in the next 12 months.
Corp, I appreciate your insights. They echo my thoughts and feelings. If Idcc fails, it will not be because of our IPR.(management has said again and again that we have very strong IPR and I believe this) but because of management flaws in crafting licenses, mishandling litigation and acting in their own interests.
Loop:"3 arbiters may view them differently altogether after all of the facts surrounding the joint development partnership and early licensing are presented in January, 2005". The reality is that prior to the signing of the no royalty"license", Nok had been infringing on Idcc 2G IPR for years and what they paid us for the joint development partnership was a fraction of what they owed us for royalties in what was really a settlement to avoid an impending lawsuit.
IBM was not one of the designated OEM's that would act as a trigger for a Nok 3G rate as was Ericy.
mschere: you asked" why would you think that IDCC will be paid for GSM/WCDMA handsets? Why do you include "WE" in that which you are uninformed? TIA" You're asking the wrong question. A better question might be;"why aren't we getting paid for WCDMA anyway and after a lawsuit with Ericy lasting over a decade why did we sign an agreeement not including 3G and leading to an arbitration with Nok,\. There are plenty around to take credit when good things happen. Who takes the blame for this?
Jim Charts:"Well if that’s the case imagine my disappointment{ my being either/or Nokia or IDCC } by not hearing my final arguments to the issue." If I were Nok I'd be happy that I'd won the case and if I were Idcc I'd be pleased the documents weren't dragged out unnecessarily to be inspected by Nok
Jim charts you said "Nor do I believe any vote whatsoever regarding anything has occurred." I agree. No formal vote has been taken. Yet, as you know, the arb panel is composed of only 3 people and no formal vote need be taken to see which way they are leaning. They delayed the evidentiary hearing from July, 2004 to Jan, 2005 so they could weigh all the documents Nok had been requesting from the Ericy case. Do you think these three people on the panel would have done that if they were leaning towards disqualifying Ericy as a trigger. That doesn't make sense to me.
Marchma:re "management's representations of a very strong legal position re the Nokia and Samsung 2G arbitrations, and the strength of IDCC’s 3G IPR claims" I agree and I would go a step further. If the arb panel comes down against Idcc or if we agree to a settlement that is not really strong, then the things necessary to save this company would be a change in top management and the announcement of new lawsuits against infringers.
Sonic:… You asked“I don't want to start a big mgmt bashing contest but what happens if we go all of 2004 w/o any (more) new licensees when mgmt has told us to expect them? “
IMO, failure to achieve anymore significant licensees in 2004 has already been built into the price of the stock. Any new licensee would be a pleasant surprise and would shoot the price up a bit. In the end it probably doesn't matter much as the arbitration is really what governs this stock. Otherwise the price will remain stable as we hold our breath until the decision of the arb panel comes down.
The loss to Mot was pivotal in the history of Idcc. The strategy of management shifted from an all out fight for success to a more conservative plan to keep the ship afloat while pumping small and partial successes into big ones with a public poorly informed about the details. It is time now to forget about the Mot debacle and to vigorously defend our substantial IPR from cynical infringers who figure that we are still too paralyzed by Mot to do that. Perhaps a win against Nok can free us from the ghost of Mot.
Jim:"The question here is a Sony/Ericsson license the same thing as a ERICY license?" IMO the panel has gotten past the issue of whether S/E is a trigger. Otherwise why would they be asking to see documents from the Ericy case? I believe they are into deciding the fairness of the royalty rate and the time period for which it should be applied.
Jim, even in the most unlikely event that we lose to Nok, it would not be the end. Idcc would state the truth i.e. that 3G is its real future and then they would initiate infringement suits over WCDMA, which probably should have been done before anyway. In a way it might be good. Management would be forced to take a few risks to improve the stock price just as the shareholders, who have been accepting risks all along. I believe our claims in WCDMA are stronger than those in 2G and it is high time that we put that to the test. Lets win and get rich or lose and get back to our lives.
3GDollars:
"Lucent Technologies Inc. appears to be closing in on a lucrative 3G network contract with Cingular Wireless, a deal that would mark its first commercial UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System) win to date."
If Lucent gets this deal and Idcc doesn't add WCDMA to the current Lucent suit, it will seem to be an announcement to the world that we are unsure of our WCDMA patents. I don't see how we can afford not to sue them and still expect other prospective licensees to sign .
ELI: This is what many of us have been thinking. At the time of the Ericy settlement, Howard lauded Ericy as an ethical company (or words to that affect). I have always thought that an agreement was in place for a 3G licence with Ericy to take effect if and when Ericy could be shown to be a trigger for Nok. This would answer a lot of questions.
Buyers are just starting to get interested and finding very little for sale.
Idcc share price is languishing for the wrong reason IMO. Investors are looking at a potentially poor Q3 report. Q3, is not the significant event for this company. What is much more important is the arbitration decision being reported in Q1 2005. After the Q3 report, whether good or poor, is history, investors will focus on the potentially favorable arbitration decision and this should reinvigorate the stock.
With strong IPR, you do an SOS on your OEM's. You Sign em or Sue em. This waiting is for the birds. Its a win-lose situation. Management wins. The shareholders lose.
Danny: you said "my lifestyle won't be affected if it goes to zero. Nor will it change appreciably if the price moves into triple digits which I strongly believe will happen within five years." There are those here whose lifestyle and that of their family will indeed change if the price moves into triple digits and that is why they are accepting a risk which you understandably prefer not to take. That is also why they get more upset when management takes actions which mitigate against the upward movement of the price of the stock. We can have different perspectives and both be right.
Ed is smart and knowledgeable with lots to contribute and with a good sense of humor and a touch of sadism. I hopes he continues to post, dropping the sadistic mask and letting the good guy under the mask come out.
Let's assume that the arb panel decides that SN/E is a trigger for Nok and sets a rate for Nok to pay for 2G. What is to prevent SN/E from figuring that they did pretty well not paying IDCC for 2G for over a decade, and therefore why wouldn't they decline to pay Idcc for 3G even though they would
know(after the arb decision) that if SN/E paid for 3G, they would probably be a trigger for Nok to pay for 3G. Then SN/E could let Idcc sue them over 3G the way they made Idcc sue them for 2G in a protracted law suit. If that happened, Nok and Sam would say to Idcc that no trigger for 3G has materialized and they won't pay until one does. This board has been saying that the reason SN/E won't sign for 3G with Idcc at this time is, because in doing so, they would be giving Nok an unfair competitive edge since they would be paying for 3G when Nok wasn't paying. However let's look at the possibility that SN/E might prefer not paying regardless of whether Nok pays or doesn't pay.
The countdown ia already on. It is now about 5 months till the evidentiary hearing. I have waited 5 years. I can wait another 5 months. After the arbitration with nok is over, it won't have mattered much whether we made a cent or a nickel this quarter or next quarter for that matter.
Spencer: I believe that 300,000 or more shares were traded in the hour between 2:30 and 3:30. The price went a few cents below 18 and then a few cents above and then, when it touched 18 again, it turned down without interruption. The volume at first was medium and then it really picked up without too much attention to the price. Someone(or more than one) was selling a large amount of shares at 18 or below. This selling continued until a few minutes before the close.
I also noticed the interesting trading pattern for Idcc on Friday. Trading between 9:30 and 2:30 was on low volume and in a narrow range between 18 and 18.40. Then at 2:30 it slipped below 18.00 and in one hour, on high volume,it dropped to 17.40.
I figure four possible reasons:
1.stop loss selling at 18.00 as you suggested
2.margin selling
3.leaking of info about a negative report on Monday.
4. one large seller got anxious and decided to dump before the report
Of the four, I consider #1. the most probable.
Amwonderful: I have found that when the market goes up or down just prior to an announcement and I have assummed that the market knows "before I do" I'm usually wrong. This time I gambled that the stock fell out of bed the last two days because the general market was down and because longs in Idcc had a serious case of the jitters. I hope I'm right. We'll see on Monday. Even if I'm wrong, I feel that this stock will work out ok in the end. IMHO
I'm sure you agree that whether Idcc earns 7 cents or 2 cents for Q2 does not really impact its future value. I felt that the selloff of Idcc today was overdone and that this was a difficult opportunity to pass up. A while ago I resolved not to add to my already large holdings but I can't avoid the temptation when the market seems to throw the shares out the window. This thing has to come to a head soon or I really will be betting the farm. Incidentally, I miss Mickey Britt and I truly have empathy and understanding of his situation.
L2V and dws ditto for me. EOM
I suspect that before Idcc is able to sign licensees to convenience licenses, including 3G, at meaningful rates, they are going to have to test WCDMA IPR in court. Why not initiate suit now against LG for infringement. The case will take several years and not be resolved until after Nok arbitration and the Lu suit are finished. This way we will have a head start and show that we mean to protect our IPR. I doubt that LG will pay for 3G regardless of the outcome of the Nok arbitration and the Lu case. If we win these two, it just might induce LG to settle. We're approaching D day. Sooner or later, we will have to take a risk and assert ourselves and it might well be the time to start the process now.
DNC is over and no serious disturbance. The RNC is soon and if it is also uneventful, that should help the general market and by extension IDCC. If a Muslim force fights the insurgents in Iraq, that would also help. Add that to a good earnings report and another licensee and it would make a nice brew.