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.
NYU-Poly Honors Million Dollar Donors with Membership in Elite Chevalier Society
This year's inductees are Consolidated Edison, the Dibner family, Forest City Ratner Companies, IBM, InterDigital, Grace and David J. Lee, National Grid, Peter P. Regna and Robert H.C. Tsao.
Only if they practice what they preached. Additionally, IMHO it could become pricier for them in the long run if they only payed for each standard compliant patent but to be honest there goal is to delay and not pay at all.
It goes to reasoning that since they have not release the date for earnings that the last business day of the week before the projected release day is?????
There has been a lot of interest in the report and not because it is negative, along the lines of Tomo and jefferies.
Ain't that the truth. I talk with Dan Buri today from GTT. He seemed to be a pretty nice guy took the time to talk with me and answered a few questions. The one question I wished I had asked is want prompted the date of the report being move up much earlier. It would have been very interesting to hear the explanation. On a side note he stated the interest in the report is very high.
The 4G patents have been analyzed every conceivable way possible and the end result is the patents are very strong. The 3G patents are fairly strong but the current ITC case has giving infringers time to wait it out. So the bottom line is 4g is not in question and 3G the infringers have a short reprieve but for you to come out and say the Patents are not important is very misleading at the least.
I don't buy that because if the current itc case turns out to be a lose the updated patents clearly overcomes any ambiguity that the ALJ presumed to have found in the prior patents. So IMHO it is now or later.
I would think any acquirer would want to pick their own management team not have IDCC do the honors.
Partnerships are BS becomes somebody always get screwed!
Based on yor assumption IDCC will be announcing they are no longer looking at a sale or strategic alternatives by the end of he week. So let's see what happens.
The Director of Licensing is not posted on the website while the other position is posted. Interesting however I don't know what to make of it!
Any comments from your friend regarding the GTT analysis.eom
Question, Why did IDCC release news announcing their intentions? Why didn't they carry on like MMI and just handle things behind the scene and announce when they had something solid enough to bring forward. I am not suggesting they do not have solid options now but the whole veil of secrecy is just allowing manipulators to treat the stock like a toy. The whole announcement this is what we are going to do but it is going to be done in secrecy vice just keeping their mouth shut and working it out.
Strategic partnerships say like the one IDCC had with Nok ala TDD. Nah they can keep that!
Per RS Mpartners that is not the reason.eom
WHy call IDCC when Mpartners already commented.eom
Good thoughts now add that to Rmel post and I think a few pieces of the puzzle have been solve now only a few more pieces to go I hope.
Rmel, although not in direct response to my 2nd question posted your post is 100% align with my thoughts.
" What entity(s) would make a request"
My first question is what would prevoke IDCC to follow through and add LG on a suggestion?
Question, Does IDCC add LG just because an interested party says hey we don't see LG in your court actions and there tab is not current?
What entity(s) would make a request?
Anybody have any good thoughts?
News out tomorrow or later this week the process is over and most including me are not ready for the backlash.
No it is not legal. If it is over I am sure we will hear from IDCC within the required time as defined by the law and the SEC.
It just occurred to me why Moto is not included. Many might recall Appl requesting a stay in a suit they have against Moto due to Moto's inability to defend or negotiate with any authority due to the pending sale. In the aapl filing it was more formal legalized wording but that is the short and skinny version.
Yea why not Moto?
If it is business as usual why would IDCC seek the consent of Barclays and Evercore?
If IDCC is in late stages of Strategic Alternatives Process and things are going well why add LG now?
If a consortium is in the mix do you think any of the company's being sued make a play and if not who is left to compile a consortium?
THX, I saw I missed reading through the release too fast.eom
The CAFC decision is not a factor in the process or timeline IMHO. If by chance the decision is released in time to become a factor the BOD is prepared to adjust accordingly.
It is interesting that no other analyst following IDCC has commented besides RS and Chris Versace.
I inferred that you probably was on to something and indeed IDCC may have also been exploring alternatives other then a outright sale. However if the start of an auction is at our doorsteps I believe my assumption that the big corporations only want the patents and talent. To much headbutting in developing strategic partnerships and the management of there after. I could be totally wrong but I just think that most of the executives are not wanted or needed by an Apple or a MSFT.
IMHO all the analysis done on LTE that says the IPR is good justifies the Engineers. So what about 2G and 3G? Hmm interesting you should ask. 2G was done in a void as IDCC or IMMC did not play in the standards for GSM they were off building TDMA a cousin of GSM, and 3G while IMHO IDCC has the patents behind the inventions the technical writing for the patents is in question. Could the engineers be blamed for the soundness and how well the patents are written to match the standard? Hard to say in the midst of battle on multiple fronts and needless to say even within the standard bodies.
New tweet by RS states he agree w/FOSS something to the effect GOOG, MSFT, IDCC, AAPL and next few weeks should be interesting. Not sure exactly what FOSS has stated but I am sure it is like RS reiterated next few weeks should be interesting.
A good point was brought up in the conversation and that is a company needs an IPR portfolio that is deep as well as one that spans across the globe to all the markets. The time and money it takes to accomplish this endeavor is too long for multinational companies that want to to be competitive in wireless. I add also if you want to be competitive for ages to come you want the Cow and not just the milk. IDCC is a big fat cow with plenty of milk on the shelf and plenty more to come.
The involatility is way above normal. If there is a leak management is going to have to release news.
My take on dealreporter if there is any truth to the rumor the 1-2B would be someone taking an equity stake in the company. Kinda along the line of thinking DataRox has been suggesting. No way LTE alone is sold for 1-2B.
Data Rox,
I don't disagee that IDCC's executive management would like to hold on to the company and still create value, however I just don't see any of the big boys wanting the same outcome. If it is AAPL, Intel, or even Goog I think they would want total control and the ability to control and manage the assets(IPR) and engineers minus the lawyers and executives. Any one of the companies have better are equivalent lawyers in house and the same goes for management. What they don't have is the IPR are the talented engineers in the mobile space. JMHO>
When did MMI and GOOG file such data, was it before or after and when was it available for the public!eom
My speculation you don't hire both Barclays and Evercore if all you want to do is explore strategic options. One reason why it wouldn't be good for a mid cap is due to a a significant expenditure of cash to hire 2 companies to advise. Barclays is not cheap a lot of overhead and big salaries. Evercore is not cheap not much overhead but a boutique company such as Evercore has top salaries from the top all the way to the bottom that needs to be covered. Note MMI only hired one company to advise per the SEC report.
I think all the speculation is based on the reuters and forbes reporting that bids are due.
Thanks again Jim for he Jefferies conference info. It is good to hear what the investment community has to say directly about Idcc and what research has continually shown IDCC to be a leader in LTE. In he constant evolving standard and as companies jockey for position IDCC has moved around from first to fourth. My observation and deductions forms listening to the conference is as follows:
The research concludes IDCC position as a top holder of LTE IPR based on current ratified standard.
Also not directly stated but I deduct that IDCC is ranked on existing patents awarded and not the ones still in he hopper. Important to note Jefferies stated the patents are better written and easier to cross reference to the standard.
What is even more promising is IDCC has a google more patents awaiting to be awarded for LTE and beyond.
Current 3G was not assessed outlook is they are not as cleaned as the LTE. A little disappointing but there is upside IDCC is currently getting paid for 3G and some of themmoremimportant patents have been rewritten to clarify some of the confusion.
IDCC has some minor investments that I believe will bear fruit as we move to LTE
The cash Position of IDCC is what it is
In the conference I heard names such as Aapl, GOOG, samsung and a few others what I didn't hear but I think are possibilities are intel, Facebook, and amazon. Intel similar to aapl and qcom. A big company with lots of value trying to move into mobile in a bigway. They have hardware galore they have chip capability but are weak in the patents as well as no operating system. Aapl has operating system, hardware, but still relatively weak in patents. Facebook only has the webs and a following. if they don't evolve to control their destiny they are going to be strangled by the likes of google, apple, and Msft. GOOG is trying to dig a moat for protection but I don't believe hey are secure yet. My take away is IDCC is extremely valuable to several companies.
Thanks Jim IMHO valuable info!eom