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.
I think I've got it!
Given Howard's background, they've gone to government-type reporting, like GDP.
If I'm correct, they still have one revision to go.
Note the word "preliminary" in the Dow Jones release:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa. (Dow Jones)--InterDigital Communications Corp. raised its fourth-quarter and year results based on higher-than-expected royalties received after it released preliminary figures.
Great! Let's see what they do with Ericy's report, which is due in a couple of weeks.
Will PWC prevail? Or will the Wallenbergs rule the roost?
And to steal a comment from Janet, "we're staying open a bit longer, to make sure we get all the sales reports possible, before reporting."
And to quote one of your favorites, I guess "that depends on your definition of 'bit'". LOL.
Bob. I would imagine IDCC and PWC thought getting earnings correct for the full year 2002, was paramount.
But the rest of the world is within two weeks of the traditional cutoff for 1Q.
Some investors will be pleased on Monday. Others will be rightfully perplexed.
Is PWC going overboard, in light of problems with other companies?
IQ. Now that you mention it, Janet has said in the past, that getting licensees to report on a timely basis is often a problem. As I recall, some report monthly, some quarterly, and others throw a dart at the calendar.
Given their conservative approach to everything, I think you have the right answer.
You said, "If the $1.9m increase in revenue came from just one licensee, then it gets rather unusual."
However, the release states that the "late" revenue came from "the recognition of HIGHER royalties from certain licensees..."
"Licensees" obviously means more than one.
But saying "HIGHER royalties" complicates what should otherwise be a straight-forward news release.
Why didn't they just say "ROYALTIES", since there is no mention of receiving "revised" reports?
Once again, I expect someone will call KOP Monday, and get the facts.
Make that two, bartender.
They certainly didn't get the reports at 5 o'clock today.
If this wasn't IDCC, I'd say it was strange indeed.
More than one customer reported late, between February 11th and March 14.
But we've only got two weeks to go in March. So why shake the bushes now unless, as you said, IDCC had enough in its sock for a good 1Q?
An 8% increase in earnings is nothing to sneeze at, when it comes to IDCC. But..............
The stock is up .26 to 14.02 in AHT.
Amen.
LOL, yourself, JK.
When, in the last 10 years, did Ericy ever do anything that was logical?
JK. Ever the cynic, I have no confidence that Ericy is engaged in realistic settlement negotiations.
Judge Lynn may have delayed, after the parties indicated they might settle. But the leopard has shown no signs of changing its spots.
Delaying bad news as long as possible, is still the mantra of the Bully of Sweden.
I see. Like Brylcream, a little dab 'l do ya.
I cannot say more. But June is the date.
From Stant, on Yahoo. I've asked him to call his broker back, and try to find out his source:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Re: Stant. Nothing that I've seen. Nie
by: stant19111 03/13/03 11:42 am
Msg: 143332 of 143336
My broker said negotiations are taking place between Sharp and IDCC as far as renewal of licensing agreements that expire in June....
Posted as a reply to: Msg 143331 by laranger_2
Message
Rev. Final comment.
Judge Lynn delayed Harris because of a "conflict". No further information was given.
Judge Lynn also changed the trial date on Harris.
After announcing on January 31 that the trial was set for May 31, it was delayed until October.
They're are no REAL clues as to why she delayed in either case.
Given the history of sealed documents, I don't see how anyone has a basis for believing that Sanders made rulings that should be reviewed.
My comment only addressed the issue of whether Ericy might want a sharp judge and jury, versus a Motorola-type.
Does that indicate that IDCC might have asked for removal of Judge Sanders, with Ericy abstaining?
Ericy knows they infringed for 18 years. Wouldn't they far rather have a judge and jury that didn't understand the technology, a la Motorola?
Ghors. Whatever happened to the "see how much sticks on the wall" strategy?
Some claims are strong, some weak, and others are "throwaways".
Ericy has played this game for 10 years, hoping to keep the other side busy, and clouding the overall picture.
Even a bad pitcher occasionally gets a stinkball by an umpire.
Before the Jobs Report at 8:30, IDCC lookin' good with an imbalance.
Bid 13.26, Ask 13.25.
I believe there's a note that the shares were acquired under the ESOP plan (401K).
Let's hope he doesn't sell.
Thanks. But seems to me that a win is a win, since most cases don't go to trial.
Same as Ericy/QCOM, IMO.
Still, I believe Judge Lynn will pound the gavel on May 15.
I sure wish you and BT would explain what you're saying.
BT. I believe you're right on many counts. But I'm confused by your statement:
"I would think that a settlement based on a one time payment for past infringement and future use would not be in InterDigital's interest and would not help in setting the rate for the accruing Nokia royalties.."
Why?
8,300 shares purchased at 13.12, well before the bell.
Aha! Now I don't have to ask if Anders is Joran's brother. LOL.
Having been wrong 100% of the time when it comes to figuring out "why", I can only give a wild guess again.
First, Ericy has been batting zero when it comes to trials and patent disputes. IMO, Ericy knew this could be "The Big One", and talked IDCC into it, so that the latest trial would draw less public attention. IDCC went along, pushing all the "nice" buttons that might cause Ericy to finally come to the table.
A smaller point: This is right up Howard's alley. He says nothing, unless someone beats it out of him. If the filings are sealed, he doesn't have to answer questions (unless required to do so by the SEC), and can blame secrecy on the court.
The court told me some time ago that the parties requested that (virtually) everything be sealed, and Judge Sanders went along.
Although the Harris trial let some cats out of the bag, the revelations of D3 indicate there will be more fur flying if Ericy goes to trial.
Fixing prices is one thing.
Trying to stamp out competition is another, right?
Some of those exhibits may never see the light of day.
But let's hope they ruffle the feathers of the Lady in the Black Robe.
They may also give Howard, Harry, and the legal team a little edge.
JK. Every time I see something about confidential agreements between operators, the word "Antitrust" keeps popping up.............
Probably means nothing, but the Europeans are a little more "inclined", than U.S. companies.
Ericy is at 5.99.
Chartex/Red.
Thanks for your replies. I can't respond privately.
Chartex/Red. Two questions:
Chartex. Did the recent information you discovered add more fuel to the fire regarding Ericy's actions in the 1980's/early 1990's? (I thought we saw this before, but you are obviously more optimistic after seeing the latest info).
Red. Please confirm that OKI appeared to be in cahoots with Ericy in 1993 (the confidential agreement) regarding avoiding IDCC patents, but then, for some reason, they bolted and licensed with IDCC in 1994.
I believe he'll be on for three hours, from 7:00 to 10:00.
Plenty of time to get around to IDCC. But he generally talks about the markets in general.
Louie Navellier will be on Squawkbox tomorrow morning.
Send an email to Louie at www.cnbc.com, if you have a minute.
Precisely. But Frick and Frack, as you call them, appear to be getting a little desperate as we move closer to May 15.
Great leverage strategy: Sell 100 shares to drop the price, and buying 2,500, after you've driven it down.
Does this necessarily have to be a "real" seller?
During the three days preceding last Friday, about 1 million shares were traded.
Each day, ARCA, CINN, INCA, and/or their customers sat on the Ask, and took us down to the 13.50's. In many cases, they dropped 100 share bombs at the Ask, but the same MM's/ECN's were waiting at the Bid with offers for 2,000 shares and more.
They've been doing to the same things for days (including today), and it would appear they could be selling the shares they bought at 13.50 last week.
I sure hope F&J has the Rule 68 thing covered, if it happened.
But NOK is not the only one to compare royalties with, right?
And without NOK's little tidbit, IDCC could not have kept up the fight.
Once again, justice hangs on a hair.
L2V. Dale Petersen is about the only thing that Ericy and IDCC have agreed on, for 18 years.
Let's hope that was Ericy's biggest mistake.