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 should bode well for IDCC.
http://www.minyanville.com/buzz/buzzalert/goog-down-on-patent-issue/11/05/2012/id/165104?camp=syndication&medium=portals&from=yahoo
The Google (GOOG) is likely down on this story as the spin seems to be very negative. Folks, there is a huge silver lining here. While Google wants a pretty strong royalty rate, and they might not get it, there are two interesting facts to note. The company holds essential patents that are not in dispute. What is in dispute is the payment of the royalty rate. The other fact is that they are not currently getting paid for those patents. So even if the royalty rate is lower, it will go from getting ZERO from AAPL and MSFT to getting paid on every (or nearly every) mobility device sold.
Again, GOOG is much better at buying assets than almost every other company and I suspect they looked at this untapped "revenue stream" very closely. My conservative assumptions have this royalty stream at $1.3-1.5B per annum. Further, margins on this would be in the 95-98% range. Again, most think the Motorola purchase wasn't "smart", just as most thought the YouTube and Android purchases were poor decisions with the biggest criticisms being that Google was overpaying. The $1.6B paid for YouTube may go down as one of the best buys in the last 50 years and I think the Motorola buy could end up being nearly as good. However, I'll note that this requires a multi-quarter forward view and I'll issue a reminder that I was very positive on Android (and hugely positive on YouTube, though that was pre-Buzz days) in early going, guiding for that platform to see 50% share when they had about 3% share. I was wrong... they just printed a 75% share quarter.
The biggest thing people miss with the Moto buy is the value of patents, the value of Moto selling future Nexus (or near Nexus) devices and the "build vs. buy" analysis on the acquisition of the product design and manufacturing capabilities of Moto. This looks even better after backing out the huge net cash balance that Moto had at the time of the deal.
Read more: http://www.minyanville.com/buzz/buzzalert/goog-down-on-patent-issue/11/05/2012/id/165104#ixzz2BNNvCBy9
JMHO,
vg_future
felix7, I understand. The headline can be changed to something like "could gain" instead of "to gain". Good enough to make people think of the potential that IDCC has.
JMHO,
vg_future
Gungrey, thanks for the Forbes article. These type articles should get more publicity and maybe a headline like "IDCC to gain from iPhone5 success" would be really helpful.
Thanks again.
-vg_future
okay, thanks for the clarification. Appreciate it. EOM.
glennymo, could you tell what "69 million plus today’s deal" are you referring to. TIA.
-vg_future
Form 4s. Dividend payments in RSUs. No big deal. EOM
Postyle, agreed. Thanks for the MPartner's reference. It makes sense.
-vg_future
JimLur, I am not sure if the author really understands IDCC because he says Kodak imaging patents can be used as defense and hence would devalue the portfolio. Even in the case of Google, he thinks that MMI patents are good enough to defend against Apple and MSFT. If that is the case, why is MMI having an issue doing the same. It will definitely be more ammunition, but not certainly a complete defense. So, as per few other analysts, Google might still need IDCC's patents.
-vg_future
felix7, don't waste your energy...not worth it. Some posts are not worth responding. Your time will be well spent on something else. I will take the analyst's word and management's stand/update over these guys who spread nothing but doubt (knowing fully that it is wrong).
-vg_future
Interesting article from techcrunch............
http://seekingalpha.com/article/287595-google-s-motorola-acquisition-is-brilliant-or-really-stupid?source=yahoo
I liked this part and the article gets interesting from this part onwards
But those patents. Those glorious, wonderful patents.
In losing the Nortel patent auction to Apple, Microsoft, RIM (RIMM), and others, Google lost out on 6,000+ patents. With a battle over the InterDigital (IDCC) patents just getting started, there was a pretty decent chance they were going to lose another 8,800+ to their rivals. But with the Motorola buy, Google gains at least 17,000 patents. And if some other applications go through, perhaps as many as 25,000 patents. In one fell-swoop. Crazy.
It raises Google's patent pool from around 2,000 - over 1,000 of which are from a deal they just did with IBM - to around 20,000. That's around what Microsoft has. And nearly double what Apple has. Deterrent obtained, right?
Well, not so fast. As FOSS Patents points out, Motorola's patent pool may not go far enough to cancel out some key patents owned by Google's main rivals. Remember, both Apple and Microsoft were suing Motorola well before this new deal was born. Those cases remain ongoing, but FOSS' Florian Mueller believes that Apple and more so, Microsoft, have the upper hand in each.
-vg_future
I agree that, in general, the longs are holding pretty strong....but, noise causing crowd is still there starting unnecessary and distracting discussions. Anyway, IMO, IDCC will be bought out with or without Google in the transaction.
-vg_future
All, the guys who are strongly advocating that IDCC is doomed due to this deal are not real longs and remember that when they pretend to sing your tune (yet pissing in the punch bowl every now and then) on any other day.
-vg_future
Think for once....if MMI cannot protect itself against Apple and Microsoft...what can Google bring to the table that would change the landscape. Bigger question...what can Google give its partners (HTC, Samsung and likes) to protect themselves against Apple and Microsoft. I think Google needs more than what it got from MMI (ofcourse it also boatloads of other things that it might not need from the deal).
JMHO,
vg_future
Fog1937, possible...this deal could take months to clear the regulators. I am just wondering how the other handset manufacturers are protected against their own fight unless GOOG finds a way to stand behind them with these newly acquired patents. A consortium would be one way where everybody chips in their patent portfolio.
Anyway, interesting to see how this unravels.
-vg_future
What was Jha's comments last week..."open to Windows based phones"...I wonder how that would go under the new regime of GOOG.
-vg_future
How would it protect the other guys (Samsung, HTC, Sony E & LG)? They really have to transfer the rights of their cross licensing to these companies....so, did these companies chip into this pool to buy MMI?
-vg_future
loophole73, MMI most probably has cross licensing with other companies, but how does that help HTC, LG, Samsung and Sony Ericsson against these Android fighters. They really have to come up with something very creative to break up MMI or start a consortium to effectively use the patents for defense purpose. Either way, it is not a clear picture. Also, GOOG has to do something with the manufacturing wing because MOT/MMI handsets would compete against the handsets from these other companies that are happy that GOOG bought MMI.
It would be interesting to see how this story develops.
JMHO,
vg_future
I like this line in the retraction
GTT Group has denied that they view these patents as worthless.
Rather than just saying they don't have anything to do with the story, they said more than that.....indirectly it means that they think the patents are worthy.
I will take that. But, whoever did the original story should be jailed.
JMHO,
vg_future
jmspaesq, I think it is not illegal unless they are trying to make money out of the info by trading stock (or help somebody make money and receive kickbacks). As you said, it will be just like sources close to the matter...nothing more nothing less.
JMHO,
vg_future
JimLur, thanks for the clarification. That's what I thought...it could be the Canadian guy...my 2 cents in guesswork.
-vg_future
Gamco, thanks for that article. Looks like this guy was able to put IDCC's patent portfolio in the right perspective with its excellent value properly depicted.
-vg_future
The_Net, as loophole mentioned in the other post, I think there was something worked out between IDCC and Tantivy prior to the actual agreement. But, my point in publishing the other post from IV and countering what MTJBKH tried to bring up for discussion is that the tweet was very self serving and totally inaccurate.
- DOJ is not in the business of blocking a deal unless there is a deal announcement or some type of official announcement that names the companies involved (on both sides of the deal).
- DOJ was investigating how the Nortel patents were won (Canadian authorities already cleared this...so, it shouldn't be a big deal) and what they will use them for (is it to stop GOOG from being successful with Android).
So, nothing in here tells me that DOJ is actually stopping any deal that IDCC is getting or going to get. I am calling out the guy who tweeted it and purpose of bringing it up for discussion on this board after 1 day....again.
JMHO,
vg_future
jmspaesq, I agree that it is a plant based on the wording.
-vg_future
jmspaesq/MTJBKH, look at this IV post (thatnsk to Jaxx12 to bringing us the information from IV other board). Here is the post
http://investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=65&mn=53237&pt=msg&mid=10783414
Here is the heading of the post...a telling one.
DOJ Interest in Interdigital rumors is BS Notice is made after agreements are signed but before closing...
That is a BS rumor to help shorts.
-vg_future
913474, these patents are for a different purpose and do not cover the wireless world. So, GOOG still needs the LTE patents.
-vg_future
MTJBKH, looks like self serving. This is yesterday's NEWS...why is being brought to discussion again...don't we have enough mess on this board? The investigation is to look at what the winning consortium/group did in Nortel auction and how they are going to use it. This guy is trying to put IDCC in the mix and trying the create doubts....there is a clear agenda here. Actually this guy should be prosecuted for saying that "DOJ is resisting positive deal for IDCC....." and spreading wrong information. It his opinion and DOJ's opinion.
-vg_future
goodguy, you can put him on ignore (unless they recently removed that option for free members). However, you would still see the responses to his posts though.
Goodluck to you.
-vg_future
paheka, it might be more like get into Apple's business through CRUS rather than attacking. To my knowledge, Apple stopped or about to stop buying chips(or something else...I don't remember) from Samsung and Samsung might be looking at a way to ride Apple wave by other means.
JMHO,
vg_future
dndodd, why not? It is a great incentive. Now they should close the deal quickly.
vg_future
scooby5, dividend related RSUs.
felix7, I think Barclay's target doesn't mean much now because they are brokers for any deal that IDCC works out. So, they can't really put a number up there when they are partly or fully involved in the discussions.
JMHO,
vg_future
nicmar, I think that the no CC message is pretty strong and should create enough interest for an upward movement.
JMHO,
vg_future
From the PR..no CC..something must be really close or under very serious consideration.
Company Update Regarding Quarterly Conference Calls and Guidance
Due to the company’s announcement that the Board of Directors has initiated a process to explore and evaluate potential strategic alternatives, the company is suspending regular quarterly conference calls, including the company’s previously announced call scheduled for Thursday, July 28, 2011 at 10:00 am ET, and financial guidance until further notice.
JMHO,
vg_future
JimLur, I believe that the Mpartner's number/target was 167 (or a range from 118 to 167). But, there was another analyst or article that said 120.
-vg_future
Centerline, Motorola is a complex case.
First, the management has to take that route (it is just Carl asking for it...we all know how his asking worked with Yahoo).
Second, Motorola has to worry about its own patent infringement exposure. Currently it uses these patents for cross licensing.
So, probability of this happening is less.
-vg_future
nicmar, it is a courtesy gesture for someone who questioned the intent. I am not saying that he didn't go on margin, all I said was that he didn't try to pump up the stock because he went on margin (as some on this board implied). Anyway, I will leave it to the conscience of the poster to do the right thing (whatever it is). Also, as I said, it is a happy moment and I don't want to take much board space with this discussion of who said what.
-vg_future
In this happy moment...probably we can forget all mud slinging...but, I personally would prefer the guys who questioned NukeJohn's intentions (and his margin usage) to apologize to him.
Congratulations and good luck to all!
-vg_future
Is IDCC halted...found this on RMBS board.
IDCC
07:58 ET 7/19/11 [StreetAccount] IDCC InterDigital exploring potential strategic alternatives ($41.51)
The company's Board of Directors has initiated a process to explore and evaluate potential strategic alternatives for the company, which may include a sale or other transaction
Shares halted
-vg_future
Warbil, the max pain theory fails many times as we have seen in the past. So, it might go up too.
IMHO,
vg_future
The covering before the Nortel NEWS might have happened when IDCC touched sub 35s (that is a great price for IDCC considering all the potential and also the runup to 58). They just got lucky or smart if they shorted over 50.....but, if they went short under 30...then, you know how smart they are.
-vg_future