Loving life
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.
Chartex .. Some people have called me a wordsmith and I can't remember the last time I misspelled something or used poor grammar. BFD! Half the time folks don't have a clue what I'm saying. There is never a time when one doesn't know where Mickey is coming from .. even if it is outer space once in awhile LOL.
The things some people consider important .. it boggles the mind.
MO,
Danny
dclarke .. Maybe they want to be the first ones to do the impossible and prove a negative LOL.
MO,
Danny
Jim and Mickey .. TeeCee was talking about a hostile takeover and I don't believe he implied that it would actually be for $40. As I understood him, the bidding war that would most assuredly ensue would BEGIN at no lower than $40. Attempts at a hostile takeover .. particularly at a 100% premium .. could bring all the attention/recognition we've been seeking for years along with a "hockey stick."
MO,
Danny
lem and AMC .. What Idcc needs to do is to hire an experienced WS Institutional Salesman who is widely recognized and respected in the money management community. Forget PR .. waste of time and money. The price will be driven by institutions and they are historically sold on a one to one basis.
IDCC has no relationship with a brokerage firm so there is no institutional sales force pounding the table about IDCC. The few analysts covering IDCC are NOT salesmen, at least in the direct sense. So IDCC needs to hire at least one if not more to do it themselves. A few years ago that would be almost impossible to do given the compensation on WS and the cache of working there. Not so any more for sure.
MO,
Danny
M3S .. AMEN! eom
Mickey .. Good on ya! Don't listen to those who say it was a nothing response. Janet could have just as easily brushed you off. In fact, she did just the opposite and has set you up to inquire further if you receive nothing back from management. I suggest you wait at least two weeks and if you don't hear anything send a short e-mail to Janet asking if management has had any reaction to your concerns and comments.
MO,
Danny
M3S .. Having been a good sized option holder before I retired, there appears to be a couple of significant misconceptions on this board about options. First of all, they are not "free" .. they have a strike price. In fact 36% ($438K) of WM's and BK's recent 8/3 sales went into IDCC's coffers to our benefit. Second, and most important, just because the remaining options were "given" to directors and officers as part of their compensation package, that does not mean that they have not felt the same degree of pain as we in terms of the approximate $10/share drop since the ID. They were counting on that money for every option share they own just as we were. The fact that it is an "unrealized loss" was as little comfort for them as it has been for us. They want that money back ASAP as do we and you can be damned sure they are going to work as hard as they can to make that happen.
MO,
Danny
NeoInvestor and Jeffree .. There has been one very important change since I left WS .. the "smart" money is no longer attached at the hip with a buy and hold investment approach. The markets are so liquid and efficient now that the fear factor of being left at the station when the train pulls out is almost non-existent. So they buy and sell them in the short run even though they might be looking to hold long term. There was an interesting article a couple of days ago about a controversy among Goldman clients re: a select few preferred clients being tipped off to short term trading opportunities on a regular basis that are at odds with the published long term research recommendations.
MO,
Danny
Jefree .. It is incomprehensible to me that some institutional money on the sidelines has not moved into IDCC in size. The risk/reward characteristics should be right in their comfort zone. I've tried to think of a reason why it is not happening, especially at these prices, and I've drawn a complete blank.
MO,
Danny
Dmiller .. We have some pretty good "analysts" on this board: Revlis, Olddog, Dclarke, all of the attorneys, Data Rox, Last Choice, M3s and others. They are doing for this board EXACTLY what the IDCC sell-side analysts are doing with their clients during this time of surprising and significant disappointment: hand-holding. It is one of the analysts' most important jobs in times like these and their clients expect, make that demand, that they bring some rationality and clarity regarding IDCC's future in light of this totally unexpected lack of a settlement coupled with an adverse ID by the ALJ.
I'm sure some of what the board "analysts" have opined has been comforting to most here, myself included, as the stock continues to drift lower .. with the exception of you, of course. I can't imagine why you spend as much time as you do on this board with us mere mortals when compared to someone of your intellectual superiority and unlimited knowledge of all things investment related.
MO,
Danny
Jim .. THANKS VERY MUCH to you and Tom. The professionalism and breadth of Tom's reports continue to improve with each one he writes. Sometimes sell-side analysts are the perfect antidote to overreaction to the downside. We are fortunate that the analysts who cover IDCC have so far weighed in with similar opinions re: the ALJ's ID.
MO,
Danny
truly a legend in his own mind .. I'm honored to be on his ignore list LOL
OD .. You appear to want prices to be determined strictly on an analytical basis; however, there often is an emotional factor involved.
It is not a question of "want" it is a REALITY that prices are determined in the long run strictly on analytics. Price movement based on emotion is just short term "noise" with negligible effect in the long run.
MO,
Danny
dclarke: Just an FYI, prior return is no indication of the future and is really irrelevant unless you can go back in time, but I cant.
Anyone that doesn't understand that is in dire need of a remedial class in Investing 101. It is all about maximizing the future returns of your entire portfolio. In that regard every share of every stock you own is a candidate for replacement every day with another which the investor believes will have a better relative return with the same or less risk over a given time period (typically 6-12 months).
Constantly reevaluating one's portfolio with an eye towards improving future returns is a VERY daunting task involving enormous amounts of DD and one which most individual investors do not have the resources, time, experience, discipline and, most importantly, desire to perform. As a result many individual investors are over concentrated in a few stocks that they are pretty much committed to riding up and down for extensive periods of time because the prospect of searching for more promising ones to replace them is overwhelming. Saddest of all, are the ones who become professional victims.
MO,
Danny
Mickey .. All the mean vicious people I've run into were never picked to be on a team in high school. Sadly, they never learned one of life's most important lessons that there is no "I" in team. Happily, there are less than a handful on this board comprised of predominantly team players.
MO,
Danny
JeffreyHF .. I'd be surprised if they didn't. Will they be successful .. who knows. Will IDCC be successful in their appeal of non-infringement .. again, who knows. I'm just glad that IDCC still has a few arrows in their quiver and that it appears that they were intentional about being sure they did in that regard.
MO,
Danny
slacker711 .. You quoted me out of context and, as a result, missed my point entirely.
Of course infringement was the preferred result and the primary objective. However, it is comforting to know that we have a management that went into this with their eyes wide open and did not bet the farm on an infringement ruling. They clearly thought through carefully how large and how long term a hit IDCC might take should they lose on infringement. I am absolutely certain that WM .. or any CEO for that matter .. could not have conducted what everyone here acknowledges was the best IDCC CC yet if he was not prepared well in advance for this outcome and ready with a detailed game plan that will eventually mitigate the damages for all shareholders.
Without such a thought process and contingency plan, he could have easily blinked first and ended up settling for far less than we hopefully will eventually get. It is not whether or not IDCC will get a better result with Nokia and others in the future due to a ruling of validity and enforceability rather than non-infringement but instead that IDCC management had a strategy that went well beyond a single roll of the dice. That is what separates the best management teams from the rest of the pack.
MO,
Danny
OD .. I would agree .. infringement was definitely the #1 objective. I would like to think, however, that IDCC management foresaw as part of their plan that a worst case result of a ruling of validity and enforceability was worth the risk of a non-infringement ruling and MIGHT even eventually prove to be the better result.
MO,
Danny
Mickey .. We have disagreed on more than one occasion but I have a new found respect for you as a man. You have the courage of your convictions, put your money where your mouth is, and there is no kitchen hot enough to make you leave. You should do a Timex commercial because you sure can take a licking and keep on ticking. AND, most importantly, you wear your agenda on your sleeve at all times where anyone and everyone can see it. Anyone who doesn't keep that agenda in mind when reading your posts should not be investing their own money and you have nothing to apologize for in that regard.
Good letter to squawk box .. hopefully they will respond appropriately.
MO,
Danny
GAB .. You certainly could be right. On the other they could opt to protect those investors on Monday who are defenseless.
MO,
Danny
dmiller .. Thanks .. Do you or anyone else know the time parameters for approval of and additional buyback?
MO,
Danny
Mickey .. Thanks.
Danny
Anyone .. I should know this but I don't. How much powder, if any, is left in approved buyback(s). Can another buyback be approved and announced by Monday morning?
TIA
Danny
drwein0 .. If a settlement does not occur today, the lack thereof will have been priced in by the end of the day. In that regard, any close above 29 will make me VERY happy. Then the only thing that can take it down further is an adverse ruling for IDCC and I think the probability of that is very small, not zero, but VERY small.
MO,
Danny
MJP .. Oh they know if they are going to settle or not. If yes each party will try to squeeze out every little advantageous drop right up to the deadline. Think labor union negotiations in the face of a strike threat.
MO,
Danny
MJP .. My guess would be that the Judge would say NO WAY! Get back and try and settle even if you just have to sit there and stare at each other every minute day and night until I release my ID.
MO,
Danny
dmiller .. The next time you "prove" something will be your first. A single data point does not a proof make, particularly when 20/20 hindsight .. your speciality .. is the foundation for said proof.
Your prediction for the intraday low today and approximate time of occurrence is ???
MO,
Danny
dmiller .. You really are kidding, right? You are suggesting that "experienced" buyers (like yourself I guess) would know before the fact when the intraday low will occur and wait until then to buy? If you are able to do that, please tell me now BEFORE the market opens what the intraday low will be today and some rough indication of when it will occur.
Most rationale investors would measure the extent to which pre-market and AH buyers were ripped off by comparing the buy prices with the market close. Using your measurement techniques, one could just as easily assert that the pre-market buyers avoided buying at the intraday high.
MO,
Danny
dmiller .. Have you checked actual results since the beginning of the run-up against your assertion that "inexperienced" buyers of IDCC in pre-market and after hours end up being ripped off? My casual observation is that just the opposite has been true each day.
If I am right then the IDCC pre-market and AH at this point in time does provide a good indication of investor sentiment as well as a likely significant disconnect between demand and supply.
MO,
Danny
Count .. Thanks .. excellent response. Very close to how I feel.
MO,
Danny
Jim .. Looks like you have established a better source than Harry now to get any answers you would like if the information can be disclosed. Succinct and clear. And the blog link was a nice touch.
You can get more DD info with honey than with vinegar LOL.
MO,
Danny
The Count .. I'm not debating your position but just trying to be sure I understand what you would do if you were management. What do you think is an appropriate settlement? And are you saying that you would settle for nothing less and go forward with the ITC action if you don't get it?
TIA,
Danny
dclarke .. Thanks a lot .. some excellent enhancements .. I'm going to plug in my own numbers now and see when we will be able to fly first class again LOL.
Danny
revlis .. If Janet has to ask the engineers, it does not sound promising.
Little too quick to reach that conclusion in my opinion. I would imagine it is SOP for her to check with engineering first on important questions like this to get a better understanding of the breadth and depth of the potential for the company before she goes to licensing.
I also thought it good news that Janet apparently has the kind of relationship with engineering that she can have a dialogue with them about something like this. IR and the Engineering Department in companies don't typically have such a relationship. Lots of IR folks avoid asking questions of engineering out of fear of sounding stupid.
MO,
Danny
lando1 .. Here is a link for pre and after market trades:
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/ExtendedTradingTrades.aspx?mode=&kind=&timeframe=&intraday=&charttype=&splits=&earnings=&movingaverage=&lowerstudy=&comparison=&index=&symbol=IDCC&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&symbol=&FormType=&mkttype=PRE&pathname=&prevPage=quick&page=premarket&selected=IDCC
Danny
Magilla ... HOW CAN THIS BE ANYTHING BUT FANTASTIC!
I don't have a clue .. the quotes from Olddog re: Janet to Rmarchma & lastchoice are 2-3 years old .. Not dumping on either one but old news is just that .. old news. There has been a lot of water under the bridge since then. FWIW, I'm going with the Jim and the newest news.
IMO, you are the most credible and balanced poster on this board and that is saying something given the credibility of the likes of Jimlur, Revlis, Loop, Ghors, The Count, and on and on.
Thanks for all you do (VERY unselfishly) for this board.
Take care,
Danny
bulldzr .. Man, I am definitely losing it. I thought I responded to your post this morning, but apparently something distracted me and I never hit the "SEND" button. Anyway, here you go.
It was a culmination of several incidents .. don't remember the one that broke the camel's back .. where Raging Bull failed to provide Jim with the kind of customer service (mostly technical) that he needed to maintain the quality of the board. At the time there were tons of user-friendly features here that weren't available on RB (don't know if that is still the case) but in order to have a "Club Board" on IHUB everyone would have had to pay a fee.
Jim didn't want to do that and close out those on the RB Club Board that didn't want to pay. So he took on the unenviable task of trying to replicate the RB Club Board here with at least one hand tied behind his back and someone from IHUB looking over his shoulder having the final call. Over time he, not surprisingly, gained more and more respect from IHUB for himself AND for the board, but at the end of the day he still fell short of having the ultimate administrative control he previously had on the Club Board that made it so special for investors.
It is important to remember that anyone could have taken over for Jim on the RB Club Board but no one ever did although some feeble attempts were made. Those folks quickly found out what a difficult job Jim had and has and exited stage left.
Have a GREAT weekend!
Danny
Jim .. You have mail .. eom.
Jim .. Sorry I was unable to talk much when you called tonight. I was so sorry to learn of your macular degeneration as well as the ongoing difficulties with your other health issues that you had previously told me about. Talk to you tomorrow.
Hang in there friend,
Brad
PS There will NEVER be another board like the Raging Bull Club Board where you had complete control. Given your lack of a "hammer" you've maintained this thread closer to the Club Board than anyone else could have.
Dclarke .. Ahhh, I got it. I don't use legal paper. I use only 8/12 by 11. Your spreadsheet is very readable even for an old goat like me that needs "readers." PIA, I might add.
Have a great weekend!
Danny