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.
JimLur, I think Goldman poured water on NVDA by maintaining the neutral recommendation and a target of 15 when they are currently trading over 20. Also, I think NVDA is going through bunch of other issues including its fight with RMBS (which they lost at ITC already....though they licensed with RMBS going forward, the past royalty numbers aren't worked out yet).
-vg_future
Nokia is a different animal...they go after other companies to declare the non-essentiality while protecting their own domain. Some of the things that NOK does do not look like "business as usual/normal"....they talk from both sides of their mouth and what not.
I fully agree with you that IDCC is not aggressive.
-vg_future
JimLur, IMHO, the same applies to every other company listed on the pie chart. So, relatively, IDCC's position might remain the same.
-vg_future
Going by his past timing....we should move up significantly from here. It is all good for the stock.
-vg_future
Positive event tomorrow. Just a reminder....tomorrow Verizon is expected to announce iPhone (CDMA version) and this means (from what I read on this board) that IDCC's licensee Pegatron manufacturing these iPhones and hence more revenue for IDCC.
-vg_future
IMHO, there might be some short covering with some assistance from a group (maybe MMs). Looks like the stock price is being walked down on low volume and then the buying happening at the lower prices without much price movement. Maybe stop orders are being taken out. It is also possible that someone is trying to get out of their position ahead of CAFC and there is no corresponding buying pressure (though there is buying) on the other side.
This is purely speculation and I am trying to make sense of the trading this morning.
I don't want the resident "smart-aleck" of the board to comment on this post. You know who you are and you better save everybody's time.
-vg_future
postyle/JimLur, thanks for the posts. I didn't mean to cause the confusion.
-vg_future
NukeJohn, I think that list is infact for puts. Look at the prices, they reflect puts...not calls. I am unable to copy paste the calls and puts information from my TDAmeritrade account
Here is the link from yahoo.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/op?s=IDCC+Options
-vg_future
Anybody has any thoughts on the huge call volume in deep in the money (strike prices at 35 and below)options for Jan, 2011?
TIA,
vg_future
Thanks olddog967 for the analysis. IDCC signed Samsung and couple of other licenses/extensions during 2009. Management's bonus/awards for 2010 seem to be more than 2009 which means that they might have closed something significant (not announced yet) during 2010 in addition to Casio license. I have my fingers crossed to find out what it is...maybe the NEWS will come out during CES. JMHO
-vg_future
NukeJohn, thanks for the response. I appreciate it.
-vg_future
NukeJohn, OT..small favor. From RMBS boards, I understand that you used to follow TIVO. It is seeing some action today. Is there a key event today? TIA.
-vg_future
olddog967, or somebody is looking for an opportunity to jump in (and maybe cause some short squeeze at the same time).
-vg_future
Oh Boy! we already have posters playing stock trend gurus. I sometimes don't understand who is driving what on this board. Now, we have people already downplaying dividend.
JMHO,
vg_future
Thanks Revlis. This NEWS is a little misleading...ofcourse when it comes to IDCC, there is some NEWS service out there to screw it up for IDCC.
The piece that says Shares of InterDigital Inc., which provides technology for cell phones, slipped Friday after the company said it has lost a customer accounting for about 5 percent of its revenue in the fourth quarter
This is more a like an initiation fee...not an ongoing fee. The ongoing revenue might have been from the end products that would have been sold by BECEEM. Probably, no analyst has included that in their revenue model (MPartners certainly didn't). This NEWS bit certainly took the wind out of revenue guidance beating the consensus. I hope IDCC announces the dividend to cause short squeeze.
-vg_future
thanks Data_Rox. What I meant was that someone on this board presented details. Once again thanks for the details.
-vg_future
As per this board, it is BECEEM that was bought by Broadcom. Since BRCM have their own technology/solution for this chip/product, it is more like they don't need IDCC's solution (that was licensed by Beceem) anymore. So, it is not like the regular patent license...it is a technology/solution license. IMHO.
-vg_future
GBR, I think IDCC still would have recorded some or whole of that amount (as per the original 8K for this agreement we were supposed to record some amount this quarter as well). That is my 2 cents.
And again...please don't start the whole fixed fee vs variable license discussion....IMHO we beat that drum many times.
JMHO,
vg_future
The wires are carrying the "beating the consensus" NEWS. However, they are also carrying the "lost a customer" piece in there, but, the truth of the fact is that we haven't seen any product revenue from this customer (other than the solution revenue)....so, why should we worry about any negative impact when we don't and cannot quantify the positive impact.
JMHO,
vg_future
postyle, yes. A real fresh breath of air. I am tired of the bullshit from the fear mongering analysts. I hope they got crushed in the recent upswing.
-vg_future
postyle, thanks for that tweet. We should get positive reaction from the market then. guides above consensus ...I like the sound that.
-vg_future
Good NEWS coverage. Already posted on this board, but Yahoo finance page just posted it.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/236362-more-pads-and-tablets-better-for-rf-semis-than-equipment-manufacturers?source=yahoo
-vg_future
It is a planned sale. So, not a big deal.
-vg_future
bulldzr, thanks for the clarification. EOM
-vg_future
thanks olddog967.
-vg_future
bulldzr, this means that there is another entity which counts towards Heartland holdings to bring the total close to 10%, right?
TIA,
vg_future
I think Heartland numbers are reported under 2 different entities (I am not sure if olddog967 or teecee provided that info) and the total, I guess, is close to 10%. JMO, I could be wrong though.
-vg_future
magillagorilla, thanks for the update. Do we know the reason stated for the postponement (is it opposed or unopposed motion or a joint motion)?
TIA,
vg_future
From teecee on atomicbobs....IDCC on UBS's LBO list.
http://www.atomicbobs.com/index.php?mode=read&id=566696
Thanks teecee for posting it.
-vg_future
Nuke & Data, wouldn't the 50% also include the dual mode (2g & 3g) handsets where IDCC's rates would be little different? I think the rate makes sense only if it is pure 3g handset.
TIA,
vg_future
AMCSATX, sorry, I misunderstood....I thought you were saying that it is a big deal....anyway, it is not a big deal...we are on the same page.
-vg_future
AMCSATX, again half story....tell the whole story...it is a planned sale. Why is it a big deal? It shouldn't reflect the day to day events or latest developments at IDCC.
-vg_future
All, you would see many other new "so called" concerned investors going forward and thomo is just the beginning. You can easily identify their dance as soon as they start. I would just ignore and not entertain these posters for the better use of board space.
This "thomo" alias is born on 10/31 and he/she is already concerned that Samsung deal is bad and will be over in 2 more years. Give me a break...how much obvious can that be.
TIA.
-vg_future
thomo, if I remember right it should be around $160 mill plus interest (which is 5%). Olddog might be able to pull up the actual numbers. Also, IMHO, Samsung got the same waiver as what NOK got and there arbitration amount came out larger than what IDCC settled with NOK. So, I think IDCC evened it out for them to match NOK at that point.
-vg_future
thanks rmarchma for the analysis (covering apple). EOM
-vg_future
NukeJohn, thanks for your analysis. I was about to post that your call is great. I can't wait for rest of your post to come true.
-vg_future
romuluss, did you say De"Wine" guidance....sorry, couldn't resist.
-vg_future
Data_Rox, you said
Not sure if anyone is really aware of the "value" of IDCC's LTE portfolio, but I bet LG has pretty good insight to the Pantech deal (and most things in Korea, especially since we used an "intermediary"). Many need to understand that patents "declared" does not mean "patents essential".
Then they should also know that part of the Pantech deal that involves equity stake. Now, IDCC can put whatever value it sees in that part of the deal because it has a vested interested in improving Pantech's future. We cannot discount this part of the deal. I know the dollar value mentioned in the PR, but I am referring to the potential value.
Just thinking out of loud.
-vg_future
JeffreyHF, regarding your PM. I am a free member and can't do PMs. Here is my response.
I will take your word for that. We get so much of negativity on this board regarding IDCC deals and hence it is hard to distinguish sometimes. As true shareholders, we both have the same goal...goodluck to you.
-vg_future
Yes, I understand. I was only referring to it in case Infineon chip solution is not used...that should make a difference in the ODM equation, I believe.
JMHO,
vg_future