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.
DD, thanks for the response. I understand that the percentages keeps varying as the big guys (and maybe new guys) get into the 3G arena. However, I thought some of our OEM and ODM licensing would take care of any lost percentages (for ex : we do get paid for certain SE and MOT and maybe even Samsung & Nokia phones though we don't have a direct license with them yet).
JMHO,
vg_future
revlis, okay. EOM
-vg_future
revlis, I saw that 30-35 % numbers in IDCC's presentation (8K filing dated Dec 3rd or 5th of 2007) after the AAPL and RIMM signed. So, we could still be missing some other un-announced license (or un-accounted impact of one of the signed licenses)
-vg_future
revlis, thanks. Was that in the CC or some investor presentation? Either way, I was basing my analysis on that. If we go by that number then 30-35% of 3G market wouldn't account for 80% of the goal or would it??
I guess we will have to wait and find out.
-vg_future
olddog967, thanks. I thought that came from presentation or the CC.
-vg_future
data_rox & olddog967, am I right in the analysis in my post to DesertDweller
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=26057272
TIA,
vg_future
dclarke, my feeling exactly. Now, they are in a better position to negotiate.
-vg_future
wilco244, they said late last year or early this year....so, there is no reason to be disappointed. They never said that they will be done before Jan 15th.....that was our assumption as it made logical sense with respect to RSUs vesting.
JMHO
-vg_future
DesertDweller, I think you are wrong on this one. As per the Nasdaq investor presentation on Dec 3rd (after signing Apple and RIMM), IDCC has licensed 30-35% of WCDMA and CDMA2000 (3G)...see the link below...
http://ir.interdigital.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=116582&p=irol-SECText&TEXT=aHR0cDovL2NjYm4uMTBrd2l6YXJkLmNvbS94bWwvZmlsaW5nLnhtbD9yZXBvPXRlbmsmaXBhZ2U9NTMxNDYwMiZhdHRhY2g9T04%3d
If I remember right, then IDCC's goal was to license 50% of 3G and 80% of that would be 40%...and looks like they accomplished that....so, there might be another license in the wings (can I dream for a moment...maybe it is MOT which doesn't have that much 3G presence) or Giant is lot bigger than what is visible.
JMHO,
vg_future
revlis, I think it would have been more like around 30000 (300% of around 10000 RSUs surrendered).
-vg_future
olddog967, bingo. Good point. I guess they met 80% of their target then. If I remember right, one of the goals was to license 50% of 3G and I guess the company already said that they licensed (or receiving revenue) from 35% of 3G market....that should put us at 70% of goal (35/50)....so, they have another 10% that they accomplished (either Giant or one other license in addition to Giant might have done that). I am keeping my fingers crossed. I can wait if I am wrong in my calculations/theory.
-vg_future
Okay, let's beat this bit of information to death and show how we are overvalued at these prices. This kind of mentality bodes real well for shareholder base and share value. But, just before you do that think for a second and see with unbiased mind....we are still way undervalued at these prices. This would only "dash" (as the most learned guru mentioned on this board) hopes for people who have options with higher strike prices......truly speaking a deal done before 15th or 30th of this month (or even next couple of months) shouldn't matter for stock holders.
IMHO, all this will be noise in retrospect 6 months from now.
Goodluck to all.
-vg_future
loophole73, I hope so because IDCC definitely has to settle some scores with them.
-vg_future
okay, thanks. I appreciate it.
-vg_future
sloane6, okay. Could you give us the gist?
TIA,
vg_future
lastchoice, somebody could be doing it just to cool off or kill any genuine price movement (based on fundamentals and potential). They know how investors shrug off the rumors. But, I should say Jag's 2 of the past rumors came through though.
-vg_future
sloane6, the MOT angle would be new in this game of rumors. Could you post it?
TIA,
vg_future
revlis, I think they are working as catalysts (not sure for what companies though).
-vg_future
revlis, is it possible that the everybody is understanding the impact of NOK's stay request denial and the extension of SK agreement.
JMHO,
vg_future
GAB, good point.
-vg_future
DD, why cast the doubt when we don't know the whole story? Shouldn't we give some more time and see how it pans out.
-vg_future
All, think before criticizing. Anybody can comment when they don't have a company to run. Let the financial impact (direct and indirect unravel before saying anything). Are you guys not seeing China in this!!
IMHO, this license sounds like an appetizer with main course to follow.
-vg_future
I think Giant (part of Elite) has presence in China. Was TD-SCDMA mentioned in any of the earlier license agreements/announcements?
TIA,
vg_future
revlis, was there one when NOK and SAM cases were consolidated? I am wondering if this 8-K is filed following the same logic (of course it also helps publicizing the fact that there is no risk of any further delays due to NOK's actions).
JMHO,
vg_future
whizzeresq, thanks for your response. In the worst case, an expedited resolution of Samsung would be comforting. But, I really wish that the judge comes down heavy (with some strong chiding) on NOK's new dancing request. That would keep them under check.
-vg_future
whizzeresq, wouldn't the ITC judge and the staff be able to see through NOK's tricks/dance. They claimed common grounds and got the Samsung investigation delayed and once that got delayed/postponed, they are playing their next card by trying to get themselves out of the picture altogether. Could they be more clear and conspicuously manipulative?
Is there anyway that the judge can put the Samsung's ITC proceeedings on their original schedule if NOK's request is accepted?
TIA,
vg_future
All, I sincerely feel that we are making an issue of a thing which is handled by some existing judicial procedure. So, we shouldn't be making this as a discussion point. I noticed that people are throwing out ideas that IDCC will be at a disadvantageous point with this development....I sincerely believe that the same thing would apply to even NOK (more patents could be confirmed or deemed essential in addition to the one that is already confirmed).
All my thoughts and prayers go out to the Judge's family.
JMHO,
vg_future
Thanks dolphinsmike and JimLur. We all appreciate it. EOM
-vg_future
dolphinsmike, could you just post the small summary of the chart here? I don't need the chart to go with the analysis, just the analysis would do.
TIA,
vg_future
loophole73, thanks. I was exactly referring to the same line where NOK said 'other participants' in my post this afternoon...the first thing that came to my mind when I saw that...COLLUSION...
Thanks,
vg_future
All, from NOK's release...this sounds like a collusion to me.
"The result is an extremely favourable outcome for Nokia and other industry participants," Nokia said in a statement.
meaning that they are fighting us on behalf of other culprits out there....any thoughts...anybody??
TIA,
vg_future
my3sons87, yes. I was thinking about NOK accepting "not to sue" clause (though it is limited to specific cases) proposed by IDCC. Either they are softening their stand (probably after realizing the slim chances of prevailing) or want to concentrate on other things. If this doesn't consitute a frivolous case...I am not sure what else will...anyway, one of the judges should slam these guys.
-IMHO,
vg_future
JimLur, thanks for the clarification. EOM
-vg_future
Legal experts, could this stay be related or attributed to any NOK-IDCC related court actions in England? I am wondering if there is a decision or any hint from the judge in England that made NOK to come to terms with IDCC and agree to the "not sue anywhere else" clause.
TIA
-vg_future
JimLur, if your guess is right, then that would be the second tier 1 (other than the one mentioned by BM in the CC) and would be a pleasant one.
-vg_future
gio, could the lack of a PR indicate serious discussions with Samsung? Just wondering....
JMHO,
vg_future
Have we seen a 8K from the company yet? I am wondering if the lack of one could hint at serious discussions. The new dance started by NOK could be a result of the fear that Samsung might settle leaving NOK alone in the ITC with a final date that was moved up due to consolidation.
JMHO,
vg_future
gio, thanks a lot. Much needed.
-vg_future
paheka, 2 different cases (SDNY and ITC). I was referring to ITC. However, I would love a slap on Samsung's face very much.
-vg_future
JimLur, could be the much awaited and needed NEWS bit. Thanks.
-vg_future