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.
Links for new investors in CRIS to help with your DD 8 second(s) ago
For all new investors in CRIS and for old timers for reminders as to why we are still invested. Here are links to articles to help understand CRIS, some fairly recent while others are old. In addition to these links, I highly recommend going to www.curis.com and look through some of the 2009 and 2010 presentations to see pictures in their presentations of the dramatic results in the BCC testing.
The first link is to the government website showing all clinical trials currently underway for the drug being developed by Roche under license from CRIS.
List of all clinical trials for GDC-0449.
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?flds=Xm&flds=a&flds=b&flds=c&flds=e&flds=f&flds=g&flds=h&flds=i&flds=j&flds=n&flds=o&flds=p&flds=q&flds=s&flds=t&term=gdc-0449&show_flds=Y
Board created by Curis investor that is well worth the read
http://www.pathway2curis.com/
Recent story by Currin Research
http://currinbiotech.com/articles/201012...
From May, 2008 in a Phoenix paper “'Dramatic results' for experimental cancer drug”
http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/28/20080528cancer0526.html
Forum for those suffering from Gorlins syndrome using GDC 0449.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/main.asp?webtag=Gorlinsyndrome&nav=messages&msg=2581.1&prettyurl=%2FGorlinsyndrome%2Fmessages%2F%3Fmsg%3D2581%2E1
Click on the above link to enter as a Guest so you don’t have to register to read the posts. From the posts it sure sounds like the drug works for Gorlin's syndrome.
Link below for an article discussing preliminary results for those with Gorlins syndrome
http://www.skinandallergynews.com/specialty-focus/cutaneous-oncology/single-article-page/gdc-0449-and-itraconazole-look-promising-for-basal-cell-carcinomas/81b28b8e70.html
From One-Eyed Sheep To Cancer Cure? Article from Forbes 09/03/09:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/03/cancer-drug-research-business-healthcare-sheep.html?partner=yahootix
The Curious Case of The One-Eyed Sheep From 2005
http://www.forbes.com/global/2005/1128/066A.html
Seeking Alpha article from 2/19/10
http://seekingalpha.com/article/189470-7-reasons-curis-is-worth-the-risk
This weeks story from the street.com
http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/story/10970047/1/5-bargain-biotech-stocks.html?cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
Good luck with your investment.
Near term catalysts for the serious investors in CRIS For those of you who have been following the yahoo board for more than 24 hours, you know I have been a long term investor in CRIS. I have been in the stock since 2003 and have a firm belief, hope, misguided perception, whatever you want to call it, in believing that the technology developed and licensed by CRIS will work AND works. That being said, here is what I believe are the short term catalysts that will drive the stock, both positive and negative.
In the near term we can almost guarantee that management will do another offering. They just filed a shelf offering and my personal hope is that they raise another $15-25 million BEFORE the phase 2 bcc results come in; by doing so it will enable the company to continue its current operations for another year or more without disruption.
Right now the company and it's current shareholder’s are totally reliant on a positive phase 2 result and approval. NOTHING with the FDA is guaranteed. Personally I would prefer that the company dilute our ownership by 10% today instead of trying to raise additional funds after a delay caused by the FDA.
I am willing to wait since I have waited since 2003. An announcement of a stock offering, while reducing the short term price, WILL guarantee your investment doesn’t become almost worthless if the FDA causes a delay in approval without additional capital. I for one would welcome a capital infusion today if it only reduced my ownership by 10% or so.
The more serious near term catalyst is the BCC results. If there is a delay in approval or the need for a phase 3 trial before approval, it will almost certainly cause a 2 year or more delay in the upside of the stock and the stock will drop like the proverbial rock. Like I said in a previous paragraph, from a conservative standpoint, I hope they raise additional cash when the stock is hot. I don’t want to see them raise funds AFTER a poor announcement (or what is perceived as a poor announcement) concerning phase 2.
Issuing additional shares is a risk; if management does it now and the phase 2 results are great it will turn out to be a dumb move. If on the other hand the FDA doesn’t approve the drug based on the pivotal phase 2 trials, and management raises capital now when the dilution will be less, it WILL reward long term investors and that is what management is supposed to do.
The short term players don’t matter. Right now it is the short term players that have driven CRIS up (for which I am happy) but they don’t matter long term. I am in this for the long term and I want management to be conservative to protect my investment and to protect the company.
On the upside, if the phase 2 bcc results are what I am hoping for and expect, I don't have a price target because my gut price target would sound silly. Almost as silly as the recent articles giving a price target of $40 or more. I don't know how high this will go upon approval for a cancer drug. Considering we have less than 100 million shares outstanding, at $50 dollars, the total company would be worth $5 billion. What is a company that developed and licensed a cancer cure worth?
Personally I hope they wait another month or so before announcing an offering but that is the gambler in me. My belief is that if there isn’t an announcement concerning either the phase 2 or an offering, my belief is that the price continues its climb to about $3.50 or $4.00 (or even more). That is when I hope they do another offering but management didn’t ask for my opinion.
GLTA and hopefully all investors in CRIS fully understand the risk and POTENTIAL rewards of buying curis.
Finally some Roche news about Curis that I posted on the Yahoo board
I was beginning to worry that Roche wasn't promoting the Hedgehog and CRIS in their press releases at the upcoming ASCO conference. Since I haven't seen them discussing CRIS I was questioning my belief in the potential for CRIS. As I previously posted the other stock I am too heavily invested in is Immunogen and I have seen many links to Roche discussing IMGN about the upcoming conference but not anything from Roche about CRIS.
Finally a news release from Roche that talks about CRIS (in addition to IMGN and others that I am not invested in). I was getting a little worried that Roche forgot about us, until now. Here is a link to today's press release from Roche discussing the upcoming ASCO conference. I am now feeling better (maybe it is the Ultra) but at least now I found a press release from Roche about this week's conference that mentions CRIS. Next week could be very interesting for CRIS (and IMGN) investors. GLTA
Investor Update
Roche presents early data on the next generation of therapeutic antibodies and other targeted therapies at ASCO
....Hedgehog Pathway Inhibitor (GDC-0449/RG3616)
Safety Analysis of a Randomized Phase II Trial of Hedgehog Pathway Inhibitor GDC-0449 Versus Placebo With FOLFOX or FOLFIRI and Bevacizumab in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Abstract #3530) – Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 8:00 a.m – 12:00 p.m. CST, Room S403
A PhaseI Pharmacokinetic Trial of Sonic Hedgehog AntagonistGDC-0449 in Pediatric Patients With Recurrent or Refractory Medulloblastoma:A Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium Study (PBTC 25) (Abstract #CRA9501) – Saturday, June 5, 2010, 4:45 – 5:00 p.m. CST, Room S504.
These studies feature results about GDC-0449 (RG3616), an orally-administered small molecule inhibitor of the Hedgehog signaling pathway. Hedgehog signaling is abnormally activated in certain types of cancers including colorectal, medulloblastoma (a type of brain cancer) and basal cell carcinoma (a type of skin cancer). It is thought that GDC-0449 may inhibit two types of overactive Hedgehog signaling: either within the cancer cell itself (caused by mutations in the pathway) or in surrounding cells (caused by over-expression of Hedgehog).
Genentech and Roche, under a collaboration agreement with Curis, Inc., are currently studying GDC-0449 in Phase II trials across multiple tumor types and in combination with approved treatments.
http://www.roche.com/investors/ir_update...
Wow this board is slow. Over the next 12 months or so it should pick up with the news scheduled to come out. Here is what I believe will be coming out over the next 12 months or so just in case anyone wants to read it:
Pancreatic study: According to the following site, the phase 1 study for pancreatic cancer is to be completed this month. How long it takes to get word about the study is anyone's guess.
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00878163?term=gdc-0449&rank=4
Debiopharm payments: Agreement with Debiopharm calls for 2 milestone payments to be received upon the study start and an additional payment after the 5th patient is dosed. Paserri recently stated the total of the 3 near term payments (counting the first $2 million payment) will be in the range of $10-15 million. Since Debio is going to submit for trials shortly, these payments should be coming in the next couple of months.
Ovarian and Colorectal phase 2 results: In mid and late 2010 we should get word of how those studies worked out according to recent management presentations. Assuming they go well, DNA will submit for phase 3 trials which will result in 2 milestone payments of $6 million each.
BCC pivotal phase 2 results: Late 2010 we will get word about how this study is going and DNA should be submitting for drug approval. According to a recent presentation by management this will result in another milestone payment north of the payments to be received for the phase 2 ovarian and clolorectal cancers.
In addition to the above, we should get word within the next few months about CUDC-101 phase 1. Recent information from management stated that the person with stomach cancer had his tumor shrink by 55% and it is still shrinking.
All looks good over the next year to show whether or not Curis has the goods. Good luck all. It could be an interesting ride.
The other two were added after being granted by the USPO, AFTER the trial started.
Message In Reply To:
I just learned that this case started with two patents -- but two more were added!
Why didn't they start with four to begin with?
How many claims were being tried?
How did Judge Luckern's original claims construction (Markman ruling)go?
The sad thing is shareholders approved it!
Message In Reply To:
Why buy didn't they just reward themselves with 3 mil shares of stock to be distributed!
dmiller, I actually said that to my wife yesterday before the decision that if it went against us all those who said he was wonderful would be claiming he was inept. If you look back, I never posted anything about being glad he was on our case. In fact, until yesterday or the day before, I haven't posted in months on the main board.
The sad thing is that it appears from the outside that we got screwed again with a poor decision. FROM THE OUTSIDE, it looks no different than the dingBatts decision IMO. I sold most of my stock earlier this week and purchased Sept calls to cover the upside. I lost a lot on the calls which will expire worthless but still lost a lot on my options so I feel everyone's pain. I would have much preferred that the decision went our way because I bought more calls than I sold stock to be greedy if we won, but unfortunately those will expire worthless. Even today I thought I made a good gamble and purchased a small amount of Aug calls when the stock dropped at the open. Fool me once, twice (actually about 30 times with IDCC) you know how the saying goes.
Good luck to all, hopefully you haven't lost more than you can afford.
Message In Reply To:
Yea, you noticed that too? Typical around these parts :)
Dd: It is funny but sad. It is not just you, but all of a sudden the judge is a no good SOB who doesn't know what he is doing. This is in contrast to many of the same posters who previously were saying how happy they were to have Judge Luckern as the ALJ for the case.
Depending on your tax circumstance, you may want your stock called away so it preserves your long term capital gain instead of selling the put which would be short term and potentially taxed at a higher rate. Anyone in this position should consult with a tax advisor prior to doing anything next week IMO. Message boards are not consultations with tax advisors btw.
Message In Reply To:
mjplife11,
If you bought puts they can't take your stock. You just sell the puts and in this case you will have a nice profit which will cover your losses in the share price.
Any chance this a another judge dingBatts decision that will be overturned? While the judges credentials seemed very impressive, his decision doesn't make sense to me. How can something IDCC presented as a solution to the standard, be accepted by that standard, then be declared to be not infringed? Is Luckern dingBatts brother? I know the decision can stil be overturned by the commission so the first question was not really meant as something requiring a response.
You have to wonder how he could have come to the conclusion he did. It sure amazes me. If the commission doesn't overturn this, it looks like another Ericy type multi year litigation that will be settled for pennies of what we all thought it was worth. Amazing how you have players such as Sammy, LG etc paying and Nokia gets away without paying. Feels like Motorola all over again.
How does Nokia do it? The number of bad decisions that they have had against us is amazing. Even if this gets reversed, you have to wonder how many of us will be long gone by then and how low it goes in between? I know my exposure come December will be a fraction of what it was today.
If that is the case, why did Nokia delay this so long? Another Motorola type fiasco. So much for substantial progress a year ago. You have to wonder why management said that back then? This is unfortunate for all. Good luck everyone for Monday.
Message In Reply To:
No violation due to no infringement
The rulings for all four patents are that they are not infringed and not invalid. So it seems that he's saying that IDCC has valid patents, but that Nokia's phones don't infringe on them. Wow. That is shocking to me.
I want to say good luck to all. I know I haven't posted in a while and I am still here lurking, more lately than I had been due to the upcoming event. While my overall feeling hasn't changed since my last post, I am still hopeful. After being invested in this since 1993, I can't let go even though I wanted to LOL. Many others have tried and failed also based on how many old timers are still posting.
I have been waking up like most of you, hoping that Santa finally brought us the present that we have been dreaming of. While my expectations have been lowered dramatically since Sammy from what they once were, I am still hopeful that IDCC can finally get what it deserves. Seeing so many companies get awarded huge sums for single patents like the recent posting of what Microsoft was just told to pay, it amazes me that IDCC has settled for what appears to the long term shareholders for miniscule amounts, I am still hopeful that one of these days we will get our just rewards.
Good luck and hopefully when it happens it is what we expect. Set your expectations in a reasonable level and when it happens you will be pleased or disappointed depending on your expectations. My expectations are much lower than they were before Sammy but even with my much lower expectations, the stock should still rise significantly from here IMO. Will it jump to the levels that Mickey expects, I doubt it, but it should still rise significantly if they sign for a reasonable amount. What is reasonable depends on what you are looking at and what you are looking for. What your expectations are compared with what others are expecting is usually significantly different.
Our legal system, while still the best in the world, has hurt us more than anything else. When you look at the amount that NEC, Sharp, LG and others have paid IDCC to date, Nokia SHOULD be paying many multiples of what they paid but keep your expectations reasonable and you will be pleased when the settlement is finally announced IMO. Unfortunately the system is what it is and no amount of complaining will change it.
Good luck and hopefully your (our) ship will finally come in. That's all for now. Take care.
olddog, before I begin let me just say thank you for everything you have done for this board to keep us informed. Now on to what Ronny posted and his numbers only work if you play the game of let's pretend that Sammy didn't pay anything for 2g and all past 3g sales have been forgiven. How many phones did they sell in 2008 and prior when the ASP was higher than it will be going forward? Hundred million phones? Two hundred million phones? All royalties on these phones forgiven? The arbitration award for 2g all forgiven? All $400 million is only future revenue? Pardon my skepticism, but this is what got wall street in trouble, using accounting gimmicks to pretend your financial statements say one thing when reality says a completely different thing.
My projections and my dream for this stock died on Wednesday and I will be out of the stock some time during this year. I do believe it can and will mover higher from here but I can't see any way we go over $35-40 based on the piss poor result with Sammy.
You can pretend the $100 million per year going forward is correct but I would bet if you poll the CPA's on this board and ask if they would feel comfortable signing off on those numbers I bet most on this board wouldn't like what they see. Like I said, I think the stock will move higher from here but is it worth $50, $75 or higher? Not a chance IMO. The agreement did a good thing in removing the doubt surrounding Sammy and the possibility that they could have walked away but it reduced dramatically their future ability to sign new deals anywhere near the rate they are currently receiving from NEC, Sharp, LG and others.
No matter what the contract says, everyone who licenses in the future will say that about $200 million was for 2g and past 3g sales, so even though you are playing games and saying it is all for future sales, for us to sign we want a similar deal or better. Good luck all and like we have all been told since we have been little, "If it seems too good to be true, it probably is." I never believed that would prove true with IDCC but for me it just did. With IDCC, until this Sammy agreement, all the numbers pointed to a much, much higher stock in the future and a much higher settlement with Sammy. I wasn't spending so much time following IDCC thinking we would see $30's as a high. IMO Nokia will get a better deal than Sammy since they already paid a quarter billion for 2g.
Message In Reply To:
Jim: Did you read Ron's disclaimer at the end?
"Therefore, if IDCC can license the remaining 50% of the 3G market at $1.50 per handset or above, then they can maintain the $1.50 or better average. However, I seriously doubt that Nokia, Motorola, and Sony Ericy will be licensed at anywhere near the $1.50 average. Thus, licensing these Tier 1 company's will probably cause a significant drop in the average 3G unit price from the $1.52 or $1.60 estimated current range, even moreso than Samsung's affect of dropping the $2 average down to the $1.52 to $1.60 range."
How much more of a discount do you think they could have gotten? If you believe the accounting, IDCC is forgiving ALL past sales for this payment. I would think that was discount enough.
Message In Reply To:
Does everyone think that IDCC got the accelerated payments over eighteen months without having to give a discount in return? Although it is not stated in the release, you can't tell me that Samsung didn't argue for a reduction in royalties in return for the accelerated payments. If the release stated that the agreement was for $500 million with a twenty percent prepayment discount, would you calculate per phone royalties based on the amount prior to discount or after discount?
I think the deal IDCC got was right in line with estimates by Carpenter even though it doesn't read that way in the release. Samsung controlled what was said in the release and I believe it was incomplete for obvious reasons. Samsung wanted the lowest amount reported. The deal would have been higher if it was a pay as you go deal.
That is the reason why legal fees will not drop significantly IMO. Motorola and Ericy's stalling tactics have benefited them so far so why would they decide to pay unless forced to. The way to force the thieving bastards to pay is with lawsuits. If the litigation ends with Nokia and Sammy the costs will be replaced by Motorola and Ericy suits not to mention all the contract manufacturers who are not paying. There are many potential suits to be filed in order to achieve anything close to 100% royalties.
Message In Reply To:
Loophole,
Do you think the settlement with Samsung makes it more or less likely other unlicensed handset makers will license.
It seems to me Samsung was rewarded for fighting all these years and got a much better deal than say LG, or the Japanese. MO
Why wouldn't others follow that course?
I respect your opinion.
Zdog
Are we really a public company? How can this company sign the 2 biggest dollar deals in its existence LG and Sammy, and not issue a press release? How messed up is that?
Message In Reply To:
bloomberg, reuters and philly inquirer...
this is just unF'ing believable.
In a previous post he said he doesn't own any of the company, he owns some March options to purchase the stock but currently doesn't own any unless I am wrong.
Message In Reply To:
I find Mickey' letter coherent and I believe our highly paid employees owe the owners of the company answers to those questions.
Why does everyone think legal fees will be going down? We have been fighting the 2 top dogs for years and sure the expenses associated with them will drop off after Nokia settles but why do you think these suits will not be replaced with suits against Ericy and Motorola? Why in the world will they settle prior to the courthouse steps? If you go with IDCC's accounting treatment, they just forgave all past sales thru 2008. So if you stall and delay and don't get to court for a few years, they will forgive all past sales for you too.
I hope I am wrong and this settlement brings Ericy and Motorola to the table but my guess is this will only embolden them to continue to steal. They just rewarded bad behavior and reinforced the idea that as long as you steal you will pay less than if you settle up early. All jmo but I think in the next 3-6 months you will see a new lawsuit filed at the ITC with Ericy which will then replace the Sammy legal savings with Ericy costs.
Message In Reply To:
TC about legal expenses:
The Samsung agreement provides other positives: Reduced legal expenses, earnings visibility, and a stronger cash position. We believe the Samsung resolution can add $0.25 or more in earnings
through reduced legal expenses from an end to 2G and 3G litigation.
ok, compare it to Sharp then. Compare it to LG where they paid $285 million thur 2010 and still owe for 2011 and 2012. How much is owed for those 2 years? Prior to the settlement with Sammy I think most would have said at least $50/year so that would have brought their total payments to close to $400 million and they sell less than half of what Sammy sells but will pay about the same amount? I sure hope we are missing something. This agreement puts a floor on our stock but the triple digit dream is slipping away IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Dd: A late reply to your post comparing NEC and Samsung. IMO you cannot make the comparison that you did. If I remember correctly from past analyses, NEC's payments are based in a large part on their infrastructure sales, while Samsung's payment would primarily cover mobile phones.
Anyone know how to get the Korean filing disclosed in the Reuters article?
The two sides signed the licencing contract on Wednesday, Samsung said in a filing with the Korea Exchange. Under the contract, Samsung has been granted licences to InterDigital's 2G mobile technology indefinitely and 3G mobile telecom technology until 2012.
Maybe Sammy disclosed a little more?
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINSEO19619320090115?rpc=44
I am very much interested in seeing Tom Carpentar's report after this news. He has been so right in his reports even though I and many others have questioned his conservative stance on things. For that I apologize to you Mr. Carpentar and thank you for allowing us to see your reports. Although I haven't really liked them when you issued them due to the fact that you have been so much more conservative than we wanted you have been correct more times than not. Keep up the great work and hopefully we will all be able to see what you have to say shortly.
From an accounting standpoint, if the $400 million is all for past usage, there is no way it could be recorded in the future. This would be totally wrong. At best it would all be recorded in the 1st qtr and most likely since the terms of the agreement were struck during the 4th qtr of last year it would probably be shown as a one time revenue figure for 2008 with nothing for 2009 and forward.
As usual there is still a lot left unknown at this point. Is Sammy buying a significant amount of their chips from Infineon which will provide us more revenue or from IDCC directly? We don't know but from what we know, it looks like Carpentar was right with his low end estimate. I would suggest all look at Tom's report from November to see estimated sales which probably will be pretty accurate then judge for yourself whether or not this is a good deal. Here is Tom's 11/08 report. I look forward to his update soon.
http://wirelessledger.com/idccNov262008.pdf
Message In Reply To:
COUNT: I do believe that when IDCC says in their 8K that the $400 Million is for past infringement and this settles all legal issues for past 2G/3G. They also state from what I can interpret that the $400,000,000 is for paid up usage through the signing of this agreement on Jan. 14, 2009. Samsung will be paying additional royalties for 2G through 2010. They will also be paying additional royalties for 3G and CDMA2000 from January 14, 2009 through 2012. If someone can explain this differently and convince me otherwise, please do so.
sinnet, well said. All these years of waiting and I continue to hope that Wall Street looks at it the same way. In this market it is good to have a floor on the stock but it signals that it won't be a huge boost IMO and from past experience, I can never predict what the stock price will do so we may wake up to the stock trading in the 30's tomorrow but I doubt it. I hope it does especially since I took a gamble this morning and I bought some Jan 30's but my guess at this point is that they will expire worthless in 2 days unless we get something from the company stating more royalties will be coming from Sammy.
Message In Reply To:
You can only wish that wall street thinks in the same way you did.
First, however IDCC and Samsung structured the deal ain't gonna fool analysts on the wall street. We all know that IDCC is about to get 200 million for past 2g usage from samsung. All the analysts covering IDCC knew it. You knew it. I knew it. The IDCC management structured the deal hoping that all the money we received can enjoy a multiple just like normal earning revenue. I believe those analysts will consider these information and assign a discounted multiple to IDCC. If normal multiple is 15-18, we probably see 10 for example.
Second, Nokia is no fool either in this game. IDCC can bring this "apparent 3g rate" from samsung and demand nokia to pay the similar rate but I can bet with you that Nokia will refuse. Nokia will calculate the "effective 3g rate" that samsung pays by subtracting the $200 million arbitration money from $400 million, then divided by the units samsung projected to sell until 2012 and then further tries to apply a volume discount on that number. That will be the rate Nokia wants to pay.
Third, when license renewal comes up in 2012 with samsung, samsung will do the same math and demand the "effective rate" for renewal. Either we concede or we have to see samsung in court again.
Whether this kind of deal structuring benefit or hurt IDCC, we shall see in the future.
The good thing in this market at least it puts a floor on the stock price in the 20's. The bad thing is unless they have some source of revenue that we don't know about, the future will never be what we had hoped if they are only getting $400 million in total from Sammy. They basically just told every infringer to never pay up early and litigate and stall and you will get a better deal.
NEC and Sharp have been screwed over the years for signing early based on the size of their market share compared with Sammy IF Sammy is only paying $400 million compared to the total NEC and Sharp will pay us thru 2012. I still don't know if that is all we are getting but my dreams of the stock getting to triple digits has been severely squashed. Good luck all and hopefully there is more to the deal than what was released so far. Based on past history, this is all we will get.
My previous post stands IMO UNLESS Samsung contracts out a large portion of their manufacturing where we will also be paid from the contract manufacturers when they are licensed. If that is the case then IDCC will be receiving the money from Sammy plus the money from contract manufacturers. Anyone know what portion of Sammy's production is farmed out? Do they do most of their own manufacturing or do they use contract manufacturers also where we will be paid from them too?
Message In Reply To:
IF the total contract amount thru 2012 is only $400 million to settle all past sales plus all future sales of 3g products thru 2012, this deal is terrible IMO. How can you talk to reps from NEC who has been paying us something like $30-40 million per year for what about 7 years now and continuing to pay, it will mean that NEC will pay us about the same in total thru 2012 as Sammy. For those who talk about time value of money, we have been receiving this from NEC for years so the value of their payments is higher if you want to look at time value of money.
NEC has something like less than a 2% market share while Sammy has 18% and in total thru 2012 they will both pay about the same dollar amount? SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE SENSE As usual the press release is ambiguous but according to an IHUB member we will only get $400 million from the second largest manufacturer. How can this be the case?
Even if you forgive all past 2g phone sales and even if the total payment of $400 million is for sales from now till the end of 2012, Sammy's estimated sales of 3g products is estimated to be over 500 million units from 2009 forward which is less than a buck a phone. From a previous post of mine:
I found what is probably a very reasonable estimate of sales from Tom Carpentar's report for sales 2008 - 2012. This does not include sales for 2006 and 2007 but gives me a good idea of what to look for. Here are Tom's estimates for 3g phones by Samsung:
2008.....68 million
2009.....87 million
2010....113 million
2011....148 million
2012....184 million
Total.. 600 million for 2008 - 2012.
I know that IDCC did not forgive all past sales and that some of the agreement covers 2g products for which they already received 2 arbitration wins plus 1 court verdict confirming the award plus $164 million bond put up for 2g. How can this be all that IDCC is receiving? It can't be so, at least I hope so.
If that is all there is to this deal it will never achieve the greatness we all believed in this market or any other market IMO. The ITC case must have gone much worse than we ever imagined IMO otherwise they wouldn't have settled for this little.
IF the total contract amount thru 2012 is only $400 million to settle all past sales plus all future sales of 3g products thru 2012, this deal is terrible IMO. How can you talk to reps from NEC who has been paying us something like $30-40 million per year for what about 7 years now and continuing to pay, it will mean that NEC will pay us about the same in total thru 2012 as Sammy. For those who talk about time value of money, we have been receiving this from NEC for years so the value of their payments is higher if you want to look at time value of money.
NEC has something like less than a 2% market share while Sammy has 18% and in total thru 2012 they will both pay about the same dollar amount? SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE SENSE As usual the press release is ambiguous but according to an IHUB member we will only get $400 million from the second largest manufacturer. How can this be the case?
Even if you forgive all past 2g phone sales and even if the total payment of $400 million is for sales from now till the end of 2012, Sammy's estimated sales of 3g products is estimated to be over 500 million units from 2009 forward which is less than a buck a phone. From a previous post of mine:
I found what is probably a very reasonable estimate of sales from Tom Carpentar's report for sales 2008 - 2012. This does not include sales for 2006 and 2007 but gives me a good idea of what to look for. Here are Tom's estimates for 3g phones by Samsung:
2008.....68 million
2009.....87 million
2010....113 million
2011....148 million
2012....184 million
Total.. 600 million for 2008 - 2012.
I know that IDCC did not forgive all past sales and that some of the agreement covers 2g products for which they already received 2 arbitration wins plus 1 court verdict confirming the award plus $164 million bond put up for 2g. How can this be all that IDCC is receiving? It can't be so, at least I hope so.
If that is all there is to this deal it will never achieve the greatness we all believed in this market or any other market IMO. The ITC case must have gone much worse than we ever imagined IMO otherwise they wouldn't have settled for this little.
I say 5:00 EST this afternoon.
Or tomorrow
Or next week
Or the week after LOL.
It was only a form 4 for Janet for withholding. It got my heart racing. false alarm
I would guarantee that the business agreement does not contain the word Approximately, that was the word used in the press release only, not in the actual agreement. There is a date certain that both parties are to perform the big unknown to us is exactly what that date is.
Message In Reply To:
stant,
I guess the word "Approx" was not a great idea.....how the hell could anybody put that in a business agreement....
I am going to wait until 9:30AM. If nothing happens, I am going to agree with you.
mo
Not that it is increasing much but it appears the last couple of minutes the volume started picking up. What does it mean? Who knows but I am going crazy waiting.
It sure looks as if all bets have been placed and all parties are waiting on the roll of the dice. Here it is 2:00 EST on the verge of what will be the most important announcement in the company's history and the total volume per Schwab is barely over 102,000 shares. Wow.
Loop then if you have MFL rights you would never have to pay a dime? All you need to do is claim MFL begin a new arbitration wait for final decision then claim MFL on another licensee and go to another arbitration? Continue to do so without every having to pay anything other than attorney's fees forever.
They never asserted that they invoked the Nokia agreement when they were in the middle of the arbitration and lost. They don't get to go back now and say we fought them for years to get the arbitration panel to rule how much we would owe under the Ericy agreement because we thought that would give us the best deal but now that we didn't win that, we now want the Nokia deal instead. We want an arbitration panel to rule whether or not we are entitled to the Nokia deal. The panel then took over 18 months and did rule and said tough, you get what we told you in the first place because that is what you asked for.
Now we have some saying that it is not fair to Sammy because they will pay a higher rate than Nokia? They are paying the same rate as Ericy which is what they asked for. Since they chose not to invoke the Nokia agreement before the aribitration was final that was their fault. They rolled the dice and lost but really didn't lose anything because they were told to pay precisely what they asked for in 2001 and when they filed the aribitration claim in the fall of 2003.
Dead horse or not, IDCC is owed almost $200 million for 2g and they have arbitration awards and a court verdict saying so when you add in interest and 2006 sales. Any forgiveness of this and they bent over again for no reason IMO. It is not like Ericy where the settlement then triggered the Nokia and Sammy deals, this will not automatically trigger anything as far as we know.
Message In Reply To:
DD
This is what the appeal is about. If you have previously asserted MFL rights and an arbitration agency has affirmed your right to do so, do you have to continue making the assertion no matter how many times IDCC changes the deal with Nok and how many different arbitration panels attempt to resolve the dispute? I am in no mood to play beat the dead horse this morning.
MO
loop
Jim you and Loop are wrong in your thinking that Sammy deserves some kind of break for 2g based on what Nokia paid. I need to refresh your and Loop's memory about what took place in the court transcripts. If Sammy is being hosed as Loop said it is their own damn fault. They had the right to invoke the Nokia settlement in April, 2006 but chose instead to go the distance with its arbitration fight instead hoping to get an even better deal.
The judge said something to the effect if you think you were entitled to get the Nokia rate, why didn't you invoke it when you learned of it. Sammy's attorney then came up with new legal terms and said they thought they had by electing a conditional acceptance (pure BS) by sending a letter to the arb panel prior to its ruling but never asked for the Nokia rate. The judge in the transcripts even said what is a conditional acceptance as he was unfamiliar with such a legal term. It was then shown they never elected the Nokia rate until AFTER they lost a unanimous arbitration claim. It was their choice and theirs alone.
They listened to their lawyers who gave them wrong legal advice and if they got hosed it was their own doing. The had the opportunity prior to the arbitration ruling to invoke Nokia's settlement terms and being the arrogant pricks they must be chose to go it on their own. They did, they lost and should be paying the same as what they asked for in their original arbitration claim back in 2001 which was the Nokia agreement in place at that time. That contract stated they would get the same terms as Ericy and that is what they ended up being told to pay.
The fact that they could have elected a lower rate by way of an MFL and chose not to, whose fault is that? I believe you shouldn't say they should get a discount just because Nokia ended up in a better position. So what? Is NEC in a preferential position today since they did the honorable thing and began paying us tens of millions per year for 3g beginning about 7 years ago with their miniscule market share? Life is not always fair but for once IDCC was awarded what it was due with the Sammy arbitration, it just took an eternity and is still not totally over, at least as far as the final signed contract as far as we have been told.
Message In Reply To:
DD, I too hope I'm wrong but like Loop I think it's possible IDCC might have forgave some of the 2-G revenue that was granted by the system.
Nokia paid 253 million for 2-G sales and that was Samsung's beef. I think Loop posted Nokia sold 1.2 billion phones and Samsung sold 400 + million so this should be considered.
Carpenter figures 1/3 of any award will be for 2-G.
Let's see what happens when the deal is afforded.
Mickey don't give up on the professional help. It could take a couple of tries to find the right medication and dosage. Not everyone responds the same to each of the prescriptions and the doctors don't really know which one is going to work for you ahead of time, it is trial and error but I do believe that your best bet is to go back to a doctor first. If you don't trust the one you were with find another one until you trust them. Depression is not something you will be able to handle yourself no matter how strong you think you are. It has nothing to do with strength, there are things we can handle by ourselves and things we need help with, depression is one of those things that people need help from trained professionals with. Good luck.
Mickey I refuse to discuss your thoughts on the CEO's comments since that has been discussed to death but I would like to comment on the most important part of your post and that concerns your health. You said you are fighting depression. Can I ask, are you trying to battle this by yourself? If so, please call your doctor first thing in the morning and get the earliest appointment you can. The first place to begin is with your primary care doctor who should be able to recommend a good psychiatrist or even start you on a presciption plan himself to help you battle this ailment.
Please do not try to fix this yourself. If you have a headache you take some aspirin, you break a leg you see a bone doctor, you have a problem with depression and it is no different than any other ailment and you need to get professional help. For some reason mental illness many times has a stigma attached to it and people think they can fix depression themselves by just "thinking straight", you can't. There are so many drugs out there that can help if that is what a doctor feels is necessary. Don't try to fight the battle on your own if that is your current course of treatment. For your sake, I hope you are seeing someone to help you.
I really don't care what you believe or not. I did not write any calls and have done so only once in my life with IDCC and it was when the stock was still in single digits and I couldn't stand the waiting until they expired, afraid my shares would be taken if there was good news. I don't have the stomach for writing calls.
I want the stock to go up and I want it to skyrocket. No amount of posting by me or anyone else will change the price this week or next. What will change the stock price will be what we hear about Sammy. If it is good to great news the stock skyrockets, if it is mediocre to poor news the stock stagnates or drops. It is really as simple as that.
As far as working it very hard, you are too funny and show your ignorance. I posted what I believe to be fair and reasonable estimations for handset sales and what I think could be the settlement figures and what I think happens to the stock price based on various levels of settlements, all jmo. You have a right to hope and believe what you want. Like I said, I believe if the settlement is in the $400-500 million range that will not move the stock at all except possibly negatively. Hell a $400 million settlement means we get the same total dollar amount from Sammy with an 18% market share as we got from LG when they had a 6% market share. LG agreed to pay us $285 for sales thru 2010 back in 2006 when their market share was in the 6% range, add in 2 more years of usage at much higher levels of 3g sales and LG should owe us at least another 100 million (actually more) for 2011 and 2012.
Would you be happy or even anywhere near satisfied after all these years of fighting to get the same total dollars from Sammy as LG? If you would be, then you are in this stock for a different reason then I am. I want to make boatloads of money off the stock and if we settled with them for a measely $200 million for 3g on top of the $200 million we were awarded for 2g then we got screwed again.
Message In Reply To:
Your comments are very odd for anyone wanting success for the company and the stock. Your comments have a little reason on settlement numbers then you twist that reasoning predicting market reaction to a settlement. It would seem you really don't want the stock to go up. You are working it very hard, posting a lot today. Sold some calls perhaps. Don't answer, Your posts have already spoken.
Let's let the market make up its own mind.
Jim I hope both you and Carpentar are wrong on this one because that will mean it was a piddly settlement again IMO and it will reward those who drag things out in the court system. That would mean only $200-300 million or so for 700 million 3g units when you consider that we are virtually guaranteed about $200 million for 2g. In addition the 700 million estimated units is also assuming 3g related sales began in 2006. How many handsets were sold prior to that? It will lower any significant appreciation in the stock price IMO and it would cause the stock to drop in the short term and never get above even $40 long term and that would take a Nokia settlement. I guess we shouldn't have long to find out.
Message In Reply To:
Andrew, I think we are looking at the 4 to 5 hundred million range for the settlement but I hope your hopes comes true?
Mickey, as you know I don't agree with most of your posts but in all seriousness, I hope you are being treated for your depression. Being under a doctor's care and finding the right medication can and does make all the difference in the world. It can take trial and error not to mention modification of dosage over time to treat it but there are drugs out there that work. There are millions of Americans that suffer from depression and unfortunately not enough of them get treated for it properly. I hope you are able to overcome your battle with it. I have family members that suffer from it and luckily for them, they recognized the need to be treated for it and it has made the world of difference being on the right medication.
A few years back I saw an interview with Terry Bradshaw and he discussed his battle with depression and how he suffered with it for decades before seeing a doctor. He didn't begin treatment until after something like his 4th marriage and while he was an NFL commentator for NBC. This is a man who was on top of the world and he still suffered from it. It affects many and proper diagnosis and medication can and does work. I wish you the best.
As far as what I said about the $500 million settlement, I was wrong in the way I posted it and meant if we get a total settlement of $500 which includes the estimated 2g money plus royalties on anticipated 3g sales of about 700 million units from 4/06 thru 12/12 then I think the stock doesn't move higher from here and IMO will actually drop a little.
I don't think it would be the end of the world for IDCC just the end of the dream for many investors including me. IMO a $500 million settlement which includes the 2g settlement would mean that what I consider to be IDCC's potential drops off significantly. It would still be a $25 stock but not much more IMO. To me that would mean they would in effect be getting only about $300 million for 3g devices from 4/06 thru 12/31/12 and in total would be paying just a little more in total dollars that LG is paying us and LG has a much smaller market share. Consider LG's market share at the time they signed which was about 6.5% to Sammy's current market share at the time of this settlement of about 18%. Not to mention that LG paid us 3 years ago and Sammy made us go through tens of millions of dollars fighting them for essential patents and what was supposed to be binding arbitration. That would kill the dream for me. Others may disagree but I think I would be out of my IDCC investment for good at that point. Had this been resolved 3 or 4 years ago or even longer, how much higher would our stock be today? This delay cost us dearly in terms of anticipated royalty rates and less money available for R&D which harmed our company irreparably.
However if we get a total settlement of $700 million (including 2g) or more it will translate into a higher stock price and the potential rises accordingly. How much higher potential will depend on how much higher the total payments from Sammy are.
Like I said a total settlement resolving all issues thru 2012 for anywhere close to $500 million and it kills the dream for me and once again proves the old adage "If it seems to be too good to be true it probably is." I do hope and believe we will be getting more than $500 million from Sammy otherwise I wouldn't be invested at this point and I don't think we will have to wait too much longer to find out.
Message In Reply To:
First you said "you have to remember the settlement also resolves the 2g issue where we have a unanimous arbitration award and court verdicts confirming the award which will amount to $200 million when you add in the 2006 sales that were not in the original calculation. So when I stated a settlement of $500 million it takes this amount into account".
Later you said "$500 million is at the very low end of what we should be getting for 3g".
So is the $500 million for 3G only or both 2G & 3G?
Also, in an earlier post of mine (http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=34729083) I stated that the 3G estimates for SAM for 2006-2008 would be 216 million units. If you assume a buck per each of these 3G units, that means SAM could owe IDCC $416 million for 2G & 3G from Apr 2006 thru 2008.
So if we only get $500 million like you suggest, that means we would only get $84 million for all 3G uints for 2009-2012!
Could you please clarify?
Loop, you can't compare the $400 million that was disclosed in a SEC filing with the award we have already been issued. The estimated amount owed by NEC was IDCC's estimate before they even stepped foot in the arbitration. The money IDCC is stating now is after not 1 but 2 arbitration panels looked at it and also after a court confirmed it.
You said Samsung got hosed. Whose fault is that? I would bet that when IDCC was awarded the $250 million from Nokia they went back to Sammy and tried to settle with them and Sammy listened to their legal advice and decided to roll the dice. IF they got hosed, it was their own doing. IDCC is the true victim of the hosing and this should have been resolved long ago but wasn't.
When you say things like Sammy got hosed it sounds as if you don't believe they should be paying that amount. Let's turn it around, I say it is IDCC that got hosed with the Nokia arbitration since they basically split what IDCC was really owed down the middle and that was what was stated in court by the judge when we tried to get it confirmed. Sammy was told to pay approximately what IDCC estimated they owed based on the Ericy settlement which was announced after that watershed event in March 2003. So I don't believe Sammy got hosed at all and IDCC is getting what it deserves.
When you compare the total amount that Sammy is paying to what Ericy and Sony/Ericy paid (about $100 million), it is comparable based on market share from 2002-2006. Sure from the outside it is not comparable to Nokia but who says the Nokia payment should be the one to compare it to? Nokia was lucky in their arbitration and paid half of what was owed and Sammy paid what they owed based on what they asked for in arbitration number 1 way back in 2001.
Message In Reply To:
Mickey
The appeal is not over in that case. Nothing is final. IDCC was certainly talking about a 400 million NEC arbitration award before settling for 53.5 million and a 3g contract. Again, our CEO was making a presentation to institutional investors and was making forward looking statements on which results may differ in the future. His purpose was to provide a picture of the abilities and potential of the company. If it makes good sense to forego 2006 2g which has still not been determined by the ICC to get Samsung on board paying us significant ongoing and increasing quarterly revenue for 3g, then IDCC should do it. One time settlements do not count for much regarding the share price.
MO
loop