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.
Revlis.
Why would you think this would delay a decision from the ICC?
Loop.
If Sammny followed Nokia's lead, wouldn't such action carry a high rate of "frivolity", in the eyes of the court?
From The Fool's article, posted on Yahoo's page for IDCC:
Growth alert
It's well-documented that many value investors are getting excited about this large-cap sale, but it's not just blue chips that value investors should be hunting for. Growth stocks, too, have been pummeled over the past couple of months. You remember growth stocks, right?
They're the small, high-on-potential firms like FormFactor (Nasdaq: FORM) and InterDigital Communications (Nasdaq: IDCC) that have helped the Russell 2000 Growth Index return more than 16% annually for the past three years.
NAZ site now shows no PM trades.
Level II shows only 250 shares.
Last two trades (small) 25.70--25.75.
You rang?
"I am still long the stock but if we are not getting another license for a few years I will be selling."
Yeah. Sure sounds like a plan to me.
Has anyone seen this, from Yahoo board:
Strong Buy Reiterated, Earnings In Line
by: barefootlawyer 07/11/06 07:59 am
Msg: 269301 of 269301
Just off the wires:
InterDigital-IDCC earnings results should be in-line w/guid-reit Strong Buy@FACT
Due to the favorable Samsung settlement and agreements with new licensees, the firm believes that current estimates could be increased. The firm finds valuation to be compelling; target price $40. :theflyonthewall.com
11,100 traded.
Last 31.48.
PMT.
1,500 traded.
Last 31.16.
GAB.
I'm not.
But I like pictures. LOL.
Three month chart.
Must be driving young Jacobs crazy:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=ERICY&t=3m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=idcc,qcom,mot
Two big Form 4's.
Yeah.
Beware of "the slide".
The DOW has gone down almost 200 points in two days, and we have slid three cents.
Why did I ever buy this stock?
Whatever would we do without your wireless engineering insight into IDCC 3G patents, your insider knowledge of QCOM's technology needs, your obviously experienced, analytical view of IDCC's market value, and your endless charts that do nothing but predict the past?
Are you the roaming Good Fairy flying over the message boards for the good of humanity, or just someone who regrets selling IDCC in the teens?
Logic says Nokia will try to use us in its license renewal fight with QCOM, and in its action in the EU.
But that would take a 3G agreement.
Level of confidence: About 10%.
This is about the same percentage of confidence before they unexpectedly agreed to pay the $253 million.
I am now leaving to wash my mouth out with soap.
Famous quotes:
"We have a good relationship with Nokia and discussion is continuing."
What was left unsaid by Mr. Jacobs?
"Some may wonder that, despite this 'good relationship', we're suing in San Diego and the U.K.
That's because they fail to understand that we're just trying to be accomodative to Heir Ollila.
He filed 10 court and related actions against our friends in King of Prussia, as part of his compulsion to win at all costs. He apparently has an ingrained distrust of Americans, and prefers to conduct negotiations in front of one of their judges.
Since he lost 8 out of 10 of these actions, we're willing to take the risk, for this highly respected and valued customer."
LC.
Yeah. It's the Lanham. Aka, The Complex Case.
And because Nokia's claims are ludicrous, it should only take a mere four/five years, unless settled sooner.
QCOM could also be looking for a speedier infringement decision by going to the U.K.
They need a ruling in their favor that coincides more closely with the expiration of their license agreement with Nokia, in April 2007.
In the good ole' U.S., our "turtle" court issues an order in May, for a conference call in November.
Mark your calendars boyz. Except for Texas and the 1800's, no one ever said U.S. justice was swift.
Mschere.
Since HTC is the manufacturer, would you think Microsoft will, in effect, be a new customer for IDCC?
JK. Howdy.
Pantech signs.
Interesting:
"Also, Nokia’s joint venture with Sanyo Corp. to produce CDMA handsets would no longer require Nokia to license IP for CDMA2000."
I can't believe you said that.
In 8 days, Jorma is Shell.
Rox.
Maybe all the complaints from customers brought IDCC to their attention. LOL.
Whatever. I'm tickled to see all the action by Fidelity, not to mention holdings in various funds by Merrill.
Spencer.
Excellent point.
Too many times we want to smash Junior in the mouth, while failing to remember that our other attorneys are some of the finest people one could meet on a message board.
VG.
At one time, I had respect for his opinions.
That time has long passed.
Yeah. This is obviously the normal pattern.
Beats me why, when the DOW is down almost 150 points and the NAZ is down 26, we're down .20.
In the meantime, QCOM is down 1.15, Ericy is down 1.71, and Nokia is down .70.
Try reading the article again.
The author quoted "a source close to the deal" several times.
Bill Daglish is not the source.
Sale.
Remember. Shortly before the LG announcement, The Korean Times published the story about IDCC demanding large royalties from Korea manufacturers.
Many of us thought it was bogus or premature. But our doubts soon turned into $285 million in gold.
Sammy, with or without 3G, is just a matter of time, and Pantech will follow, if not before.
After all, how can anyone doubt the latest article, when the author says "Samsung WILL PAY as much as $100 million", and quotes "a source who IS CLOSE TO THE DEAL"? LOL.
Mschere.
I always thought Ericy contributed its patents to the SNE JV, as part of its 50% contribution of assets.
Looks like everyone's trying to get into the royalty game.
L2V.
Hope for an ICC decision during May is fading, but is still possible in the minds of diehards.
The back-and-forth exchange of paperwork between Paris and the panel would take several days, and only 10 business days have passed since the end of April.
Add another four business days for the required announcement by IDCC, and next week may prove whether the ICC is on its toes, or taking too many long lunches.
I'm still one of the diehards.
Sale.
We're dissecting words. Try this sentence:
"Samsung will strike a mega deal with InterDigital soon for its royalty obligations for the currently-dominant second-generation (2G) GSM handsets, the source who is close to the deal said."
First, the author talks about $100 million, in a matter-of-fact fashion, with no exclamation point.
Then he quotes his source as using words like "MEGA DEAL".
Unless you're talking about more than $100 million, it doesn't compute.
Here's my definition of a mega deal, where Samsung is concerned:
$100 million for past 2G.
$___ million for future 2G.
A 3G agreement.
$___ million for a multiple-year-prepayment of 3G royalties.
After what happened with Nokia, Sammy could follow the same road and refuse to sign for 3G.
But I like this wording in the article:
"When contacted, a Samsung Electronics spokesman refused to comment, citing his firm’s policy of not talking about any ongoing royalty NEGOTIATIONS." (My emphasis).
So, Sammy admits it is negotiating.
But if they're not interested in signing a 3G agreement (even though they were pushing for 3G in the arbitration), what's to negotiate?
Rusty.
An obviously excellent sign that they mean business. LOL.
FACT is currently bidding 100 shares at .01.
L2V.
The author appears to be foregn born and has trouble expressing himself.
He makes statements without backing them up with reasons.
But I agree. This is more than a simple license renewal, with both sides seemingly having the other over a barrel.
I'm surprised he didn't mention the Sanyo JV and the QCOM GSM suit against Nokia, which can only complicate things further.
Tylon.
Would you or anyone else care to take a crack at what this author is trying to say?
QCOM: From a Financial Times article today:
"These critics say that Qualcomm's share of WCDMA IP is lower than for CDMA2000, while its royalty rates are the same.
Qualcomm disputes this, but offers no other analysis. Financial metrics suggest massively excessive returns.
Operating margins at Qualcomm's IP division exceed 90 per cent. It is entitled to an economic return on its high risk investment. However, IP operating profits of about $2.4bn this year compare embarrassingly well with cumulative research and development spending of $4.6bn over the past decade."
http://biz.yahoo.com/ft/060511/fto051120061712257814.html?.v=1
Mschere.
With the right news, it really won't matter, will it?