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.
considering they've been selling anyway since november, id say this last instance is definitley a coincidence.......also, i dont think there are many people outside of F&J, HG, and HC that know whats going on w/the case on a day to day basis......btw, did you see HG and HC selling any? tia.
jim, you nailed it:
You may succeed but be prepared to lose much more than you could gain if there's a settlement.
i think it has more to do with insiders selling a very small % as a hedge against an adverse ruling/jury verdict in the upcoming trial (which they originally thought to have been 2/10). the fact that it was pushed back the day after sales were announced is a mere coincidence imho. if they knew info like that ahead of time, they would be in deep trouble.
in the mean time, id keep an eye on your portfolio......esp when you're trying to make pennies while risking benjamins. IMHO
mschere--
why would wireless operators cancel their orders?
ams--
i havent had time to look at it today, so i cant give you a reason......im sure tc or gman though could provide a just as good, if not better analysis. later.
danny-
while i agree with the general point of your post, im not sure this is true:
If Mickey's source is an insider or can be traced to an insider then Mickey and everyone who it can be demonstrated acted on his rumor very possibly at a minimum could be forced to pay back any profits made on trades executed after the rumor was made public by Mickey, not to mention that criminal penalties for all involved are not out of the realm of possibility.
i always understood it to be that anyone can legally act on a rumor as long as its in public domain, in which case this is.......however, i believe the tipper (mickey) can be liable. not 100% on this though.....if i have time, ill try to look it up......later
OT: more lies-
I, on the otherhand, am not afraid to admit a good play when I see it and have recommended IDCC near the bottom on numerous occasions, even purchasing some myself for a short-term play now and again. But in the mid-teens there's a lot of bottomside risk over the next few months (and years).
how bout those calls over the summer?.....you know, the ones predicting it would break thru $6-7, and land at about $4.50? you were only off by $15......in the WRONG direction
other notable comments on the seybold discussion today:
raymond terry; pickwick dam,tn: mr.seybold...why do you constantly berate gsm and say cdma is gods gift to telecommunications? will you tell all of us do you own qcom stock and or do you have qcom held in another name ...it is apparent to all of us the you and jacobs are way to friendly for you to be objective....you do know with all you have said you are liable for all the love of qcom and all the hate of gsm or wcdma programs...i myself quit listening to you only after loosing my *** on qcom...you may face my lawyer...not sure just yet...raymond
Andy Seybold: Ray--bring him on--Yes I own 10 shares of Qualcomm as I do of most wireless stocks so I get the finiancials sent to me. You are entittled to your opioiion as I am to mine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mickey Britt Tallahassee, Florida: What do you think about the chances for a Interdigital Communications victory over Ericsson A.B. in the upcoming February 10th 2003 trial for patent infringement on this 10 year old case? Especially since Ericsson just lost a patent infringement case to Harris in the same federal court just a few months back and was found to have willfully infringed. The same lawyers for Ericsson in the Harris case will be representing Ericsson against Interdigital and the same law firm that represeted Harris will be representing Interdigital. Harris was awarded 61 million for 2 years of infringement, and Interdigital is seeking way over 10 years of infringement and a punitive damages and a cease and desist. I hope you will express your opinon on what a Interdigital victory or even settlement would mean to the Interdigital stock. Thank You Mickey Britt
Andy Seybold: This is about the third time I have qotten this question--I am not an attorney and I will have to do what the rest of you have to do--wait and see- the rest of the stuff is just noise to me--who represents whom etc.
tc--
personally i think it would be nuts if we turned down anything over a hundred...
uh oh, is that a tornado i see brewing? (LOL)
OT: im here when you need me, LOL.....
teecee, yes it is. eom
dwwedge--
keep in mind that we're still doing well today, relative to the mkt......i think that matters more at this point than the exact price of the stock......imho
ams--
no, an MM would NOT know....
gman.....sounds like a plan....eom
OT: boogie.....nuts are definitely frozen in chicago
tc.....my favorite has always been briefing's "in play." id consider that more credible than any of that other crap.....mho
tc......flyonthewall is similar to jagfn...
OT: maciej--remember a couple months back when he called idcc a sell at 7, and that it would probably break 4.50?
OT: ranger, correction-
That was our Hail Mary, and they put it right through the uprights!!!!!!!!!!
the hail mary is a pass....if it goes through the uprights, then it would be incomplete. LOL (hey, if i didnt say anything, then hoboso would have......btw, have you called 9-1-1 2nite? or are they still on stoli break?)
OT: RANGER
HOW DO YOU LIKE JK'S APPLES? IM SURE ONCE DOES, lol
OT: GAME, SET, MATCH......IDCC!
GOOD JOB JKJ, CHARTEX, GHORS, AND ANYONE ELSE WHO HELPED COMPILE THIS INFORMATION.
tc's post was much better:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=674636
quartz-
the only issue i could think of would be if the ericy defense team were to try to compare the single base station with a portable landline phone......i believe the MOT atty's tried a similar tactic, and maybe that was one of the reasons they won......but then again, im not sure that comparison would fly in judge lynn's court.......
LongIDCC--
FDR said it best: "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
jim-
she acknowledged it was a possibility, but she stressed that it was a very remote one.
oh i see.....for a second there, i thought there was something wrong with the company that i was not aware of....
sjratty--
so the stock price is giving you cold feet? hmmmm, thats strange....
DD--
not a bad strategy......id just be hesitant to dump a lot of stock around the trial......if i did decide to sell some though, it would be a very small %.
tc....yeah, but that probably has to do more with our recent sharp 2 day decline....also, puts are usually skewed higher in general....
DD--
Options will only get more and more expensive when we get closer to trial.
this is not necessarily true. the premium value of the option decays with time. HOWEVER, if the volatility of the underlying (idcc) is strong enough, it could offset the time decay and produce more expensive options......but as you get closer and closer to february expiration, the magnitude of the time decay gets larger and larger.......so i highly doubt that this will be the case. imho
also data,
Here ya go company B, C,D,E and F....you pay me x amount under these terms....but ya know, if I can finally get company A to pay me a higher price I'm coming back to you for more. Ain't gonna happen.
that is not true. look at the NEC agreement. technically, there is still a chance that we could receive recurring royalty payments on tdma/gsm/phs/pdc from them. janet specifically told me this. my guess is that this is based on our ability to get MOT paying, since they signed up after the MOT verdict. probably wont happen, but still a possibility nonetheless.....
data
or how about this:
way back when, idcc threatens to sue companies B,C,D,E,& F if they dont pay full price....companies B-F say, 'dont sue yet, how about we agree to something cheap in the near term, and we'll pay a bit more if needed (but not more than ericy) once your case gets resolved?'
sounds a bit creative, maybe far-fetched, but still a possibility, no?
data
You're saying because company "A" didn't pay what we wanted that we had to sell our product to company B,C,D,E, and F for a lower price just to stay in business? And management signed all those other deals?
is it possible that there could be some contingencies attached to the ericy case w/regards to these licensees? perhaps that could be used as evidence?
data--
could it be possible that idc was strapped for cash, and that after losing MOT, signed up sweetheart deals in favor of the mfg'ers just to stay alive???
DD--
it doesnt make a difference what the underlying is.......the inputs are all the same......it seems like every experienced trader in our firm has traded many different products.....(ie, one guy who sits 2 spots down from me on the desk has done eurodollar options, then equities, then equity options, now 5 & 10 yr note futures.) the same 'behind the scenes' tricks you see with equities applies to practically any other product thats traded......in addition, tc knows the fundamentals inside and out, giving him even more insight than both the usual 'trader' and 'investor'......again, MHO
DD--
tc has more trading experience than anyone on the boards.....ive only been trading professionally for a little over a year now, but i feel ive picked up quite a bit......and ill say that tc's opinions/insight/guesses are right on. ill take his word for it 1000 out of 1000 times. MHO.
GRRRRRR!!!!!!!! eom
linedrivehitter=techlover? eom
test