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.
Corp, as a response, please note my earlier post;
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=6198234
I don't know who you are and what your intention are but you certainly are one of the things that IDCC shareholders need to keep an eye on. Your blatant refusal to respond to questions about your identity and intentions speaks volumes. You need to come clean to regain any semblance of credibility
Desert Dweller,
I understand where you are coming from and it seems reasonable that there wouldn't be enough management changes this year for a takeover. However, it's been posted by many on this board, and in regards to the future it true, that it's all about 3G. That’s where the big payday for IDCC shareholders lies. There certainly will be a pop in the share price if the arbitration board awards to IDCC what most here think, but that effect might be considerable dampened with NOK's 3G litigation hanging over. Many will perceive that IDCC’s licensing efforts will greatly hampered until this thing is resolved and with history as our guide, we know that the big companies like NOK are masters at dragging litigation out.
I have no idea what will transpire nor am I making predictions but let's consider some scenarios just for the sake of discussion. HC has been described as one tough negotiator and one that would not roll over easily. He's already rich and so might not be influenced by money (even if he has been doing pretty well at the helm of IDCC). Let's suppose he WAS ousted. In the meantime a campaign to discredit IDCC, alongside other efforts to discourage shareholders, is being waged. I speculated in an earlier post about the coincidence that Cramer made disparaging comments about IDCC and the Motely Fool, shortly after, published an article that was very negative and only needed the addition of IDCC's name specifically in order to be about the company. Part of a campaign? While that might seem paranoid, it doesn't if you view it in the light of a post over on the PANL board about the practice of "naked" shorting and the attendant negative published articles that can accompany this procedure in an effort to drive down a stock price. (This link was posted by another board member yesterday. Thanks to him) A link to the page of that message, that contains the references to negative articles, is below but there are several other related pages before and after it on the subject. It's a very good read for any who missed it.
Following this line of speculation, with Harry gone, a stock shake down effort proceeds. Shorts begin to drive down the share price and many longs that have gotten tired of waiting for the big payday take their profits. The downdraft in price creates margin calls and more selling ensues. The shorts begin to cover while buying shares and options and begin to accumulate enough shares to influence management who is faced with re-election soon. (It appears to me that even the institutions would be avoiding the stock in such a climate) Knowing they might be replaced or, if they are kept on but also knowing who might be buttering their bread if they can retain their positions, they make changes that would be favorable to a takeover and unfavorable to the longs that have maintained the faith. And on the story goes…..
Could this happen? Is it already underway? I’m not saying that because I certainly don’t know. This is only a possible scenario but there could be others. Regardless, it seems to me that but all should give careful thought to what you plan to do before you act. There are events going on right now that we should keep an eye on. They might end up having more of an effect that what is presently evident.
Just food for thought.
Hookrider, I agree. The stock has lost momentum that one would have expected to be there after the completion of buyback announcement. IMO, the apparent short activity took the steam out of the potential rally. The price action, following lost shareprice support, was about to start dropping pretty quick due to the lack of buyers. A whole weekend for the good news to sink in should maximize the effect of upward pressure. It could create pressure on the shorts as well. If they start trying to cover, the "pop" might be pretty good. I hope my speculation is accurate.
Does anyone else find it weird or interesting that Cramer, about a week ago, talked about how he would sell IDCC because all they did was get involved in litigation? Within the last couple days someone posted an article from the Motley Fool about companies that developed and bought IPR for the purpose of suing other companies for profit by forcing them into licensing agreements. Isn't it a bit coincidental that this occurred just before Nokia response to IDCC's motion when they accuse IDCC of this very thing? Could it be possible that there is an attempt to influence this thing in the court of public perception?
Even more out in left field, could there be any connections between management bashing, attempts to remove IDCC leadership and high levels of shorting to keep a lid on a price run-up and create shareholder discontent prior to the ASM or, as other posters have suggested, to condition the shareholders to accept a lower price in the event of a buyout? (Sort of like the Navy using it's guns to soften up the beaches before the Marines are sent in) Could the Nokia action be part of the same effort?
IOP Seer,
Thanks for the response. One of the reasons I asked the question was I was trying to see if I could see a relationship between options, shorts and possibly some other sort of stock manipulation. Coincidently, later in the day we have the revelation about the proposal to limit management terms to one year and board members uncovering the fact that the person proposing the change was also the one campaigning on the board, incognito, to have the COB ousted. Additionally, this individual potentially has an outside agenda behind his actions. Employing a little speculation, what if this individual was working in conjunction with other parties that were playing their own part in influencing the company stockholders? For instance, is it possible that the shorts have been trying to keep a lid on the stock price so as to create discontent leading up to the ASM while others have been working the board to add to that discontent? Recognizing that something could happen to suddenly make the stock price jump, they hedged their position with calls in order to limit their exposure? Is this just one of the tools in a takeover attempt? Obviously, just speculation, but one of the things I like to do is examine all the possibilities in order to try and understand the movement of the stock price.
This of course is not the first time we have, IMO, seen posters trying to influence voting. Blueskywaves comes to mind. (Or as bulldzr so appropriately and humorously referred to him, B.S. Waves. Lol)
bulldzr,
As I'm sure you've been able to see from my other post, I can't disagree with your actions even if I don't join you. I'll just wait and see how things shake out and make decisions from there as when to sell. Good luck bud!
Jim, (I'm working backward on the post so my responses reflect that)
I agree with you 100%. The buybacks have been one reason I have maintained my confidence and have even added shares.
I don't believe you will find any post from me where I criticize management except for levels of compensation. On the other hand, in a recent post I admitted that I too was in it for the money and therefore suggested that I was in a poor position to be critical of management. (Not my exact words but it was one of the points I was trying to get across)
I hope you don't see me as someone in the bash management camp, even if I don't think anyone should feel constrained from occasionally commenting on their warts along with their better points.
Once again, (and I think this reflects my investing philosophy,) I am well invested in IDCC. If I don't like what’s going on, I'll sell my shares. I'm not going to try and change the company to improve the value of my investment. In my opinion, that's a backwards way of investing as it would require way to much time when I can simply find another company I have greater faith in and look to make my money there. (No slam intended for those who feel otherwise)
Jim, perhaps I've forgotten all the facts surrounding the IDCC compensation issue. I am possibly projecting my impression of many of the other executives recently profiled in scandals who have exercised virtual free rein in determining their remuneration. I believe it is true that many of these have taken advantage of the insulated position they have between themselves and shareholders. I do also think that shareholders have a right to be indignant and to question the levels of reward these executives allow themselves.
If HC has in fact delayed his reward until the fight has been won and he has acted to ensure that the shareholders have their just due before he collects his own, then it seems to me that those actions should be applauded at least in that light.
If you look at my recent post, I think you will see that I've been careful to be fair in my assessment of the issue and have commented that there have been other compelling posts in defense of Harry. I have also listed my reasoning for me not voting for a change in leadership,(which, by default, would be a vote to retain). One of those reasons was that I didn't feel it was likely that I had a firm enough grasp of all the issues involved and I didn't feel it would be prudent to vote when that vote might have consequences I did not foresee.
Bottom line; I am still vested after many years and have even continued to add to my position. I suppose that this tells you that I am at least, generally speaking, somewhat satisfied with the handling of events. You must admit however, that the company has not been especially forthcoming with communication that would allow us as investors to more easily evaluate managements' performance. While I understand that there are a number of issues where the company was constrained with legal and competitive issues and therefore was unable to divulge more, even with that allowance, it's been my impression that the company simply has not felt it necessary to keep the investors better informed. Unlike Corp-B though, I have not railed against management about this because I have a more passive view about the relationship between myself as a shareholder and management. Speaking for myself, I don't expect to be around as long as the people directly involved with IDCC, either in management or as employees. The reason is, honestly speaking, is that I expect to sell my stock once I quit believing the price will continue to rise in the reasonable near term. These guys will still be around. (Well compensated, but still there). I understand that my relationship with the company is temporary and therefore don't believe I should involve myself with changes that would be permanent unless I felt secure in the belief that those changes would be in the best interest of all.
Concerning Corp_Buyer running the company, the recent revelations about him have convinced me he would be the last person I would want at the helm. I have no trust in him and if he was in charge, I expect that I would be looking for the best exit point to unload my shares and move on to an investment where I had at least some faith in management.
bulldzr,
If indeed Corp-Buyer is Michael Cohen of Janes Capital Partners, then one must be skeptical about the method in which he has presented himself to this board. By not identifying himself, he has left himself open to suspicion concerning the possibility of an agenda different than he has presented to us. If his intentions are honorable and there is no reason to be concerned about his proposal, why would he have to employ deceit while running a parallel effort here on the board? His dishonesty has caused me to be wary until I know a lot more. I am in fact considerably less likely to vote against HC even though I do believe he has taken advantage of his position in compensating himself. There has been much discussion about the ethics of overcompensating oneself but there may be an equal or greater concern about the ethics of Mr. Cohen.
Where are you Corp-Buyer? Won't you come out and defend yourself?
Looks like maybe he invented a way to get in on some options.
deleted
Did the buyback of shares occur early enough to also factor into a loss due to the money spent?
gman1962,
Thanks for the reply.
gman1962,
I wonder if you could do me a favor. I think it might benefit some others here as well. Could you (or some other interested board member) repost the recent option activity alongside the short interest and corrolate the potential relationship? This might be an excellant point to help educate the other members on how a stock can be worked by hedging against shorts. I know I am interested in understanding this better as I am weak in my knowledge of option trading. TIA to you or anyone else that might be interested in taking this up.
I added 1000 last Friday.
Same to you Bull. Thanks
Rmarchma,
Thanks for the kind words. Ditto in regards to my esteem for your contributions.
As I said to Corp, My differences are philosophical (in terms of my actions concerning investing). That didn't mean that I thought someone else was wrong for taking an active role with a company they were invested in. I also think that the posters that have campaigned for Harry's ouster have made some very valid points and I generally agree that he is taking as much advantage of his situation as he can. (I believe there has also been several very good post presenting an opposite view). If he is voted out, I doubt that IDCC will fold up and it's possible that the company will become better. My post to Corp was simply to clarify an earlier post to someone else on the fruitlessness of dwelling on negative facts if it had no constructive purpose. Furthar responding, I pointed out my difference in investing approach to explain my hesitance in joining the campaign against Harry. Not that it is a better approach but I would not likely be a person that would get involved in making changes because I'm to busy otherwise to devote that kind of time for my investments. If I have to get involved like that in order for my investment to pay off, I believe I would rather move on to another one that didn't require that of me. I fully respect the fact that you have reasons to choose otherwise. I have not decided if I will vote or not.
Corp_Buyer,
I've only got a few minutes as I have to go but I want to give you a brief response before I do. Perhaps I'll follow up more later.
My response to Hardball was to draw focus on the fact that his concerns were about something that seems to me to be unneccessary and unsubstantive since little can be done to reverse the past. Spilt milk. On the other hand, personally, I believe you've brought up many valid points and questions about management and I cannot disagree with your reasons for wanting to evict HC. I'm not sure, one way or the other, however, that it will be good for the stock price or whether it will have an effect at all. Still mulling that over. Likewise, I also have no problem with your points being consolidated and posted occasionally for those who have not encountered the question and feel it is important. Conversely, I don't feel it is worth of dominating the discussion, but that is simply my opinion and I realize you don't neccesarily agree.
My difference with you I believe is philosophical. As I have attempted to become better at investing, I have tried to find companies that seems to have the greatest potential to grow in stock value. My goal is to hold the stock until I believe it has reached the highest price it can sustain in the reasonably near future and then take profits. When researching companies, one generally finds that there are factors that account for the current price with management being one of them. I take all the factors as part of that company. If management is incompetant or greedy I look at that as one of the factors as to whether I expect the price to go up or down. Typically, I don't look at it as something I personally would engage in trying to change. The reasons are many. A few are; 1) I don't want to invest that amount of time needed to influence my investment. 2) I'm not familiar enough with the situation to be sure that the effort will have the effect I want. 3) I don't want to be guilty of creating changes that might temporarilly improve the stock price if there is potential that the change would be bad for the company, especially since I not sure about or privy to all the facts. Instead, I simply decide whether the company continues to be one I want to be invested in. If not, I expect to move on. In other words, I invested in the company to try and make some money, not help run it.
There is a case however, where I would become involved and that is where I believe I have been defrauded as an investor by the management. If that were to be the case, I would support action. I haven't seen any compelling evidence of that.
While I agree in opinion with you that HC is milking his position, I don't believe his chairmanship is a factor that will influence the share price in comparison to the result of what we learn by 5/31/05. That, IMO, will be when we can make further decisions. As far as HC is concerned, once I decide to sell my IDCC, I really won't care whether HC is captain of the ship or not.
All this of course is simply MO and I certainly have respect for yours where we differ.
Hardball,
I have no problem with your post as everything you say is true.
However, and please don't take this as anything other an honest response, everyone who has held IDCC for very long, unless they've been primarilly trading, is fully familiar with the "frustration". We also thought that the litigation chapter would be behind us after the ERICY settlement. That's old news though. There's no need to dwell on it as it comes across as whining and extreme negativity. Either accept it and look to the future or sell and find something you have more faith in. If you continue to be a long, as you say you currently are, carry on with "substantive" questions, continue researching "Wirelessledger.com" and this board and otherwise further pursue your DD. Good luck. Seriously!
Gotta go for a while
Thanks olddog967,
Your post is an excellent reminder of the events surrounding QCOM's situation for the longs, while explaining a lot to those who don't know the details. It answers a number of questions.
Hardball,
QCOM didn't get paid until it prevails against ERICY through litigation. After that, the floodgates opened. As I believe you are already aware, the IDCC loss to MOT put us into the opposite situation and a win against NOK will go a long way in reversing IDCC's situation.
"Seriously, QCOM, for example, gets paid"
Luckyk57,
Good question / food for thought.
"What if a 2g rate being established with Nok triggers a 3g rate with Ericy? Noone really knows what the 3g framework between IDCC and Ericy involves."
Hardball,
Your right; they're all valid questions even if they are mostly rhetorical, since, IMO, no one here can really give you an answer beyond opinion. All have been asked at one time or another. Some will be answered, one way or another, by 5/31/05. (Hopefully). Others will either become a moot point, much less important or conversly, become even more prominent. If there is any compensation for frustration, the longs here should be rich and hopefully we will be. Good luck to you if you are included in the bunch. We are all waiting.
On the other hand, IDCC may be willing to sacrifice some of the expected 2G award, via a settlement, in order to secure the future through a guaranteed 3G rate from NOK. They may of course have to go back and adjust rates with ERICY and give up the same 2G with Samsung (both MFL's) in order to do that. That would certainly raise the stakes for IDCC. It's a real chess match.
That will be good if we get contracts and rates that pay us for 3G; bad if we don't.
'my3sons87',
I'm not sure about your response due to it's brevity but to simply and clarify part of my earlier posting I will say that I'm am going to try and modify my dealings with my IDCC stock to more closely match my original reasons for investing in it.
Good luck to you. I hope we all make a bunch of money.
my3sons87,
I would have to disagree with you on that one. I have found the discussion interesting and if I did decide to vote one way or another, it would be due to the opinion I had formed from reading the thread. However, I keep having a reoccurring thought about this and some of the other discussions in relationship to my investment in IDCC. When I first invested in IDCC years ago, I did so because of the return I thought I would get, which I hoped and believed would large and soon. I began monitoring the Raging Bull site (and later IHUB) to learn more and help me determine my best exit point. I imagine that this is similar to the same path that many others have taken to get here.
Several times I have had the opportunity to cash out at several times my original investment, but have always held on believing that the big prize was just a little farther away. (I have sold a few but only a relatively small percentage of my holding overall) Unfortunately, through all this, I have somehow allowed what was supposed to be simply an investment, become, at times, something that is entirely too important in my life. (I believe that this is the same point Loop has been when, on occasion, he has taken his sabbaticals from the thread.) As I am sure many others have experienced, I have found myself frustrated and perhaps even a little angry at myself. If I had had any idea that I would have devoted as much time as I have to studying this stock, I not sure I would have bought or I would have sold much sooner. I’m not crying as only I am responsible for the decisions that I have made but I believe all the friction over leadership is a result of similarly rooted frustrations. Otherwise, who would care? Didn’t we all just buy in just to make a profit? If leadership is changed and later the stock price vaults, will we hang on because we like the leadership even though we might think the price has topped out? Personally, I think Harry C is milking this thing like a prize Jersey cow but I also expect it’s because he’s in it for the same reasons we are; to make as much money as he can. If some think that voting to move him out will either increase the potential of their investment they should act accordingly and vice versa for those that think otherwise.
Personally, I’m going to try and become less emotionally attached and start becoming more of a trader of my shares.
rmarchma, while some have the luxury of monitoring this board daily, I have found that practice very difficult to maintain. I therefore do appreciate the fact that you may reiterate some previously made points. Some, who have heard it before, and perhaps take issue with your position, may disagree with that point. While I do understand their feelings, hopefully they can maintain their patience out of consideration for those like myself. I have not taken a definative position myself but I do appreciate the arguments that you put forth into the discussion as they are well thought out and substantiated.
Eric, that's quite a teaser!
China's response to patents that get in the way:
http://businessproverbs.com/articles/article.asp?art_id=1144
No question, we're getting a lesson in how the pro's do it. The variety of positives for IDCC over the last two weeks, despite the weakness in price, have been definitely indicating an awesome buying opportunity. I have been telling friends over the last few days that the time is near and the news just keeps reaffirming that.
So true teecee, I've been there and it sucks. Unfortunately, sometimes we take a chance when we see that big apple out there on the limb. I'll say I've lost more than I've made when I look back at the times that I've really stretched out there. I was a bit stretched out just before the 4th qtr report and have been on the hot seat since hoping I didn't have to sell. Haven't been able to take advantage of the great price we have right now either.
amrwonderful, IMO, the events of the last couple of weeks have set the stage for IDCC to begin building it's shareprice back up. The 1st qtr report, good guidance and fairly glowing analyst reports in at least one case should be enough to put on the brakes. The falling of the overall market is now about the only thing that could be considered as a reason for IDCC to go lower if it did. Since the drop in price caused by the 4th qtr miss in earnings, IDCC has been finding support in the approx. $15.80 to $16 area. It is forming a decending triangle pattern which is often bearish but if it resolves to the upside, it would be bullish. If we do in fact see a rally beginning with todays market recovery, I believe IDCC will too break out to the upside. Since the pop in price last week when IDCC advised that it would exceed expectations, and then began dropping in price, the share price has been bouncing up against a downtrend line but finding support around $16. If the market goes up and IDCC breaks the downtrend, IMO, it will be a good time, for anyone still waiting, to buy.
10 day, 30 minute chart:
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=idcc,uu[m,a]faclyyay[d10][pb50!b200!c20!f][vc60][iub14!l....
From a TA standpoint, it looks like the DOW will close with a long handled hammer candlestick. Having dipped below 10,000, touched off the bottom of it's down-trend line and then rallied back above the 200 DMA, this may be the start of a rally that could last a few days. I'd be buying right now if I weren't out of bullets
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=$indu,uu[m,a]daclyyay[db][pb50!b200!c20!f][vc60][iub14!l....
goblue, you may be correct about that. If we had gotten the kind of guidance we had yesterday, in the 4th qtr report, we probably wouldn't be so far down. It is hard to ignore the fact that IDCC's share price is still down approx. 40% despite the good guidance from yesterday.
"Help. I've fallen and I can't get up!"
goblue, I agree with you except on one point. IMO, the 4th qtr miss was undone by this qtr.s report. The key is that NOK and Samsung are now not seriously in the mix until late this year at the earliest. Long term wise, I believe that many still see the resolution of those issues as being the determining factor as to whether IDCC is a great investment or possibly being a good investment. More paying licencees will of course help modify that perception and bring more strength to the share price.
I believe it is a great investment because I believe IDCC will prevail. There is generally a summer rally after falls such as the one going on right now. The falling prices give the big boys an opportunity to make more money in a sideways market. They will buy back early in the rally and ride her back up. Perhaps after a rate hike "removes the clouds of uncertainty". That might be late enough in the year that IDCC will start seeing some sort of reliable support JMO
hookrider, I can understand your sentiments as the major oil companies are making giant profits as crude prices rise. However, your suggestion that it is designed to enrichen the oil companies does not take many, many other factors into consideration that in fact benefit Americans and the overall economy in general.
The economy, was in something of a tailspin even before the events of 9-11 and really went bad afterward. The potential of a worldwide recession or even depression was very real (were not completely out of the woods yet IMO but it does look like they have a handle on it). One issue that has not been dealt with by our country in past economic downturns, has been suffered in Japan during it's own economic troubles, and that is the problem of deflation or the falling of prices of goods and services. Because of very low inflation and the ability of foreign countries to produce goods so cheaply, the goverment has responded to this threat by using a number of economic measures designed to create inflation instead. Several of the those methods include dramatically lowering interest rates as well as increasing the money supply by printing more money. This has had the effect of lowering the value of American money overseas, thereby making American goods cheaper to buy in other countries while making foreign goods more expensive here. This has an inflationary effect. It also is stimulative to the economy, creating jobs, taxes etc.. This too creates inflationary pressure.
One other, far reaching, economic force that has a direct bearing on the economy and can have strong inflationary effects is the price of oil. When the price of oil goes up, so does chemicals (agriculturals such as pesticides and fertilizers), rubbers and plastics (tires, clothes, automobiles; virtually anything has something plastic associated with it), transportation, energy for heating and cooling, etc., etc., etc..
Despite all these inflationary influences, INFLATION HAS BEEN ALMOST NIL! Why? Because the deflationary pressures have been so strong! While some prices such as those related to oil, fuel and transportation have been going up, others still have been falling. This is a real indication of how serious the situation has been and IMO this has been the area the Bush administration has been concerned about. It is true that the oil companies have been making a lot of money but it is also true that those profits help stimulate the economy and create jobs. The high price of oil makes investing in new oil fields and exploration more attractive along with investing in alternative sources of energy. Suppliers sell more goods, creating jobs, income and taxes. (I imagine Bulldozer sells heavy equipment to the oil field contractors for instance) In the long run, this should also help make us less dependant on foreign oil. It also helps with the creation of higher profits which benefit the stock market. Today I believe it came out in the news that the deficit is now expected to be lower because of the increase in jobs and economic activity.
Hookrider, as I say, I believe there is more going on than what is readily apparent but IMO, it is your goverment at work trying to right the economic machine that got to going too fast a few years ago and ran into the ditch. Overlooking the arabs' profiteering just happens to be the best thing to do right now. Again IMO. I might be all wrong here but rather than being concerned about it, the best thing you might do is count your blessings that you too are making some money. Hopefully you're spreading your good fortune by spending some of it too because that, right now is the best thing YOU can do. Good luck!
Has anyone heard any news that would account for the weakness in the market today other than the usual "fear of rising interest rates" and "the war"?
Thanks Jim. For sure, I hope you find the time to pitch in. As I have mentioned to you before, the discussion surrounding TA/IDCC is both helpful and educational to me. Not only do I find it interesting but I also believe that, in the long run, I will be a smarter and more profitable investor. Your postings have prompted me to put forward my own thoughts and observations. I've noticed from the comments of others, that they too have an interest in the subject. I imagine that some of them following the thread, will be further motivated to pose questions and remarks that will also add to the dialogue.