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.
Thanks.
I'll change the date.
Ronnie.
You made your point well.
I was talking about other posters who repeatedly remind us that they achieved high levels in employment, which gives them an excuse for lowering ethical standards.
IMO, they should get over themselves.
On the other hand, there are several who have risen to high levels, who seldom breath a word of their achievements, because they've got it together.
April 28: NOK's answering brief, Delaware.
May: Lucent claim construction.
May: IDCC First quarter earnings.
May 12: IDCC's response to NOK's brief.
May 31: Maximum Award date.
June: Samsung arb. begins.
June: Annual shareholders' bash.
September: LU trial is scheduled.
October: UK trial is scheduled.
Unknown: Results of appeal of Judge Lynn ruling handed down.
Unknown: Results of appeal on Japan patents.
Ams.
I've been married for 50 years, and spent that time working for large corporations, most of whom tended to put ethics at the bottom of their list of attributes.
My wife spent several years in business, as well. But she never compromised on ethics, regardless of whether she was dealing with business or personal matters.
Drove me bananas at times. But helped keep me on the straight and narrow.
Ronnie.
I fail to see that "what you do" dictates "what you are".
You don't have to run a business to be ethical. To believe otherwise is an insult to everyone who tries to "do the right thing" in living their lives.
Competing with unethical businesses gives one no license to lower one's standards.
I, for one, hope you keep saying what you believe.
Mschere.
I only know one thing.
Rip isn't flying the plane, but he always has his hand on the cord.
Mschere.
Right you are.
There's no way Harry would stay for three years which, if the Arb. Panel rules correctly, could see the highest stock prices in IDCC's history.
Loop.
Is it likely that Harry would "retire" if he was re-elected?
Although he was once a "savior", he's been riding the same train for the 10 years since the Motorla fiasco, and recovered his investment a thousand times over.
If he was going to leave, wouldn't you think he would have made an announcement?
DR.
FWIW, most of the regulars on Yahoo believe as you do.
Thanks for a thoughtful message.
Thanks Jimmie.
That's no joke. LOL.
Dan.
Why does the NAZ site show no AHT?
Can you post the trades?
The release of Fed minutes did it.
Not as hawkish as expected, according to CNBC.
Art.
I've always been on IDCC's side. Especially the hard working engineers and technical managment.
BTW, have you given any thought to NOK's IPR infringement reserve?
Can you think of ONE name, other than IDCC, that might command almost half a billion dollars in back pay?
Art.
Despite all the "if's" and "however's", by my count, NOK's got a lot of wiggle room to hide a horrible mistake.
With 358 million euros on reserve, that's about $465-$485 million (plus or minus) for IPR infringement, depending upon the rate that NOK used in its 20F.
But that's probably reserved for HPON, or some other hi-flyer.
Sale.
I guess we're all doomed.
For a while, I was pinning my hopes on WHAT I THOUGHT was the big stuff, like:
A decent Award in arbitration.
A nice follow-thru with Samsung.
Success in taking on the thieves from Lucent.
And lotsa good fallout from the above.
Now, the real and most meaningful event comes to light, and I totally missed it!
What the hell is Howard doing paying $8 million for patents and assets without consulting us?
And why would he fail to divulge the name of the seller, even if he has a good reason?
The "mystery drum" has now been beaten for three or four days, and I would like to know:
DO YOU REALLY GIVE A DAMN?
Bob.
Scuse me.
But could we get another term other than "POS"?
I laugh every time you post it, and can't concentrate. LOL.
DD.
I sent a protest email, and awaiting a response.
BTW, I sent a copy to Thomas Edison.
It WAS today.
If not, board approval via conference call would not be unusual.
Toshiba is in the "Other" group, when it comes to revenue.
The total of "Other" is .2%.
GAB.
Yeah.
It's nice to have low friends in high places.
Hicks left several months ago.
Mschere.
Eads. Guy Hicks?
http://www.eads-nv.com/frame/lang/de/800/content/OF00000000400003/7/79/33406797.html
Mschere.
I don't know a tetra from a dongle.
Dan.
Notice how almost every article about NOK praises their position in China and Europe, while saying nothing about the largest market in the world (That being us'ens).
Meanwhile, the NOK boyz in their new NY office, are sitting there twiddling their thumbs, hoping Jorma throws them a life preserver.
Give it a rest, bucko!
Yeah. Let's hope they pulled one out from under the big boyz.
The purchase also included "Other assets", if I recall correctly.
Just another cryptic comment to whet your whistle.
MSCHERE.
Still working on that one, eh?
Just when we think they're loafing, they buy patents and assets worth almost as much as the Tantivy purchase.
Lotsa news to look forward to.
Right you are, Jim.
Another lost weekend.
Maybe you should establish a new Profile, where posters can publish their sentiments in stone, without making further comment:
"I hate management".
"I love management".
"I'm just wild about Harry".
etc.
Then, we might be able to get on with business.
Jim. Yeah.
But we've been getting "hundred shared" to death on the Sell side, every since we hit the $15's.
I'm sure you've noticed.
Danny.
One of our Yahoo posters ventured an opinion two days ago, concerning the current market action on IDCC.
He surmised that the Shorts/HedgeFunds and their friends were "overly-successful" in manipulating down, and are now on a fast treadmill that is hard to control.
i.e., it's a lot more risky to short at $15 than $20, and requires selling tons of shares cheaply, to keep it in the $15 range.
In your experience, do you find this a credible explanation for what's been happening in the past several days?
Tonbar.
I'm sure glad he's on our side. LOL.
O'Dog.
Another bone dug up out of the ashes! Thanks.
You are one of the busiest bees on this board and I, for one, deeply appreciate the time you spend, getting the answers.
Jim.
Thanks.
This is where it's at, at the moment, and we know it.
Some phenominal posts from your experts, just when they were needed.
As you know, we don't take ourselves too seriously on Yahoo. But it's time to kick it up another notch.
Let's hope the 10K is just the start.
Yeah.
Howard has that posted above his office door. LOL.
OK. Ponder this.
Check the sentence preceding the one about 'no damages'.
IDCC put the words together. But the two sentences don't seem to compute. The second sentence is kinda out of the blue, with no connection to "contractual conditions".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Nokia also is seeking a ruling that no royalty rate for its sales after January 1, 2002 can be determined by the arbitration panel (“Nokia Tribunal”) until certain contractual conditions precedent have been satisfied. Nokia has additionally claimed that, in any event, the Nokia Tribunal cannot award money damages."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is a job for O'Dog! Does the panel have the power to award damages/have they ever done so?
"Lucky" Jorma.
If he's right about damages, he avoids paying any, whether single, double, or triple.
GAB.
Musta missed it.
Like you and others, I always look for little phrases that could give a hint of what the other side might be thinking.
If NOK thought there was "no trigger", they wouldn't have said that, IMO.
Yeah.
For a moment, I forgot the legal meaning of "damages".
Kinda tells you what NOK might be thinking.
'Well........we'll pay the royalties, and we're willing to lose the 20% discount and a little interest, but don't expect us to pay damages.'
Is this an April Fool's joke, or what?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Nokia has additionally claimed that, in any event, the Nokia Tribunal cannot award money damages."