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.
Divided we fall.
Leon has a right to his opinion. He has been here for years and telling him to go does not contribute to our overall goal of building permanent Shareholder value.
If we have to put a proposal together we need to be united.
The proposal should only focus on the COB status (not sure if we can force a new election if his term is not up).
Poison pill removal (I'm not sure what type of vote if any we can get on the agenda).
Yearly election of all board member including COB. (Again I'm not sure what we would be able to vote on).
Before Jan I'll be asking for help in order to move on these 3 proposals.
If someone feels that this is not a direction shareholders should go in then that should be fine. People have a right to their opinion without being told to go away. I want to here everyones opinion. PERIOD.
Jim, Of course I'd like ypu to moderate if you are still willing.
Also can you put a question up?
Do you wish Harry to continue to be the Chairman of the Board in 2010?
Thanks
John
Jim these are indead 08 and 09 transaction with our COB leading the way with $4,180,000. Great job if you can get it.
The justification in keeping the cash was other companies RMBS and TSRA have litagation in place with large cash balances. Well none of these companies are generating anything near .69 per quarter in profits. RMBS is negative 25 for the forseeable future and tsra just forcasted bad earnings and took a big hit. They are earning about .25 cents.
The reason why naz is so pissed is that investing in a company that earns this kind of profit is much better than just sitting on cash. He is also scared that they are going to go blow another hundred mil in some type of new technology like they did with the modem business.
Also this can be a real windfall for those who hold, the more shares that are retired the more eps numbers go up.
I remember the internet bubble day and how stock used to fly. The reason for this was the small float. If they tool 8 million shares off the market and then signed Nokia we may get back to that $25 to $81 run that got me hooked here 10 years ago,
I was employed as a broker from 04 to 08 and did not want to get myself in trouble with my company for posting on a message board. Between 04 and 08 I sold thousands and thousands of IDCC shares to clients many of who still own. I'd like to see my shares and my ex-clients shares be worth more money. Many of these people are friends and relatives who are all underwater because of my countless phone call and repetative emails telling them not to worry. I'm sick to my stomach that I did not figure out Harry's game and yes I'm posting like a fiend to expose the wizzard of RSU's because I feel the number one reason we are priced at $20.56 today is because Harry's wants to keep his greedy RSU machine going.
Also, I've seen this act before in several companies I've invested in. The COB gets god like and you need a nuclear device to get them out of power. In all instances when this occurred the last guy standing is the COB.
I feel an obligation to the dozens and dozens of people who I've convinced in the last 10 years to put their hard earned money into this company to make sure they get back their investments. So I'm here to tell it like I see it and try to get this playing field leveled no more no less. And if this company is bought out via an open market bid with all the major players kicking the tires I'd be very happy.
It doesn't really matter at the end of the day why we lost at the ITC. The focus should be are we in the technology business not the patent law business. If this is a technology company we need partners who can build technology based upon our designs. Mainlefty hit the nail on the head when he stated that Merrit sounded like a lawyer on the court house steps. This Nokia trial is nothing more than a distraction and a detriment to building long term shareholder value.
The two big mistakes that were made here weren't at the ITC trial. The first was when Loop pointed out years ago that we should have never settled for the $253 million 2G money fro Nokia and demanded we parlay that into a comprehensive 2G/3G.
All that this did was create another selling and granting opportunity for Harry.
The next in my opinion was not being able to find a suitable partner for the modem business and have to write off $100 million in expenses. Naz was refering to money losing non-core ventures on the call.
I've always been an advocate of bringing in some dynamic people or creating some dynamic partnerships. Anybody here know who Texas Instruments is?
So while the ITC was bad from a shareholder stand point the fact is that the street beleives that the future of the company is dependant upon the outcome. Merrits words no longer have any value when trying to hold share price.
NAZ basically told them to put their money where their mouth is.
I do have a buyout agenda. I'd like to see a $45.00 a share price with CISCO, INTEL, MSFT, GOOG and APPL all making offers and moving the bids up. My agenda to put numbers like $30-$32 up is that if we do not act and allow Harry to take the company private the poison pill and staggered board would prevent shareholders from getting the maximum value.
So if we are still public by June 2010 and the share price is still in the 20's I will be posting religiously to convince you that it would be in shareholders best interest to remove the poison pill.
The problem with a "blanket repeal" of granted RSU's and incentive plans is a bad idea. The engineers and the sales guys who are truely doing an amazining job here will get hurt and leave the company. These guys and Merrit need to be rewarded. Do not forget how we got into the position of $429 million in cash and .69 cents earnings. It is because the engineers developed innovative wireless technology and Merrit and the licensing team were able to get the NEC's, SHARP's, LG's, APPL's, RIMM's, and Samsung's of the world to pay large sums of money.
I want no part of taking away from what these guys accomplished.
My very focused target is Harry and his one for you 10 for me RSU hand out for basically stepping in after the Motorola debacle. I'm sure Harry was very valuable back then but he was paid back in spades.
I think shareholders need to get an independant board, new COB, poison pill removal and the staggered board election process removed. This will level the paying field and allow for new institutional investors to start kicking the tires. They bring in a real COB who knows the INTEL and CISCO charman by first name and is in possesion of their personal cell phone numbers.
Mickey the previous post will answer your question. Insiders all selling in the 20's except for a few lucky transactions in the 30's.
-Oct-09 | NOLAN JAMES J | 20,000 | Option Exercise $10 per share. | $200,000
15-Jan-08 | BERNSTEIN BRUCE G | 302 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $6,610
14-Jan-08 | BERNSTEIN BRUCE G | 1,021 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | BERNSTEIN BRUCE G | 1,783 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $41,597
1-Jul-08 | BOLGIANO D RIDGELY | 277 | Disposition $24.37 per share. | $6,750
1-Jul-08 | BOLGIANO D RIDGELY | 1,863 | Acquisition | N/A
23-Jun-08 | BOLGIANO D RIDGELY | 1,500 | Option Exercise $4.38 per share. | $6,570
15-Feb-08 | BOLGIANO D RIDGELY | 449 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | BOLGIANO D RIDGELY | 1,318 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $30,748
7-Feb-09 | BREZSKI RICHARD | 296 | Disposition $33.35 per share. | $9,871
7-Feb-09 | BREZSKI RICHARD | 3,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-09 | BREZSKI RICHARD | 2,523 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | BREZSKI RICHARD | 624 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $14,557
4-Jun-09 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 2,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
28-May-09 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 48,000 | Automatic Sale $24.48 - $25.13 per share. | $11,910,002
28-May-09 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 48,000 | Option Exercise $4.81 per share. | $230,880
15-Jan-09 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 10,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-09 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 10,000 | Automatic Sale $26.87 per share. | $268,700
18-Dec-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 50,000 | Option Exercise $4.31 per share. | $215,499
18-Dec-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 500 | Sale $25.86 per share. | $12,930
18-Dec-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 49,500 | Automatic Sale $25.14 per share. | $1,244,430
17-Dec-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 50,000 | Option Exercise $4.31 per share. | $215,499
17-Dec-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 50,000 | Automatic Sale $25.08 per share. | $1,254,000
5-Jun-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 8,000 | Acquisition | N/A
15-Jan-08 | CAMPAGNA HARRY G | 10,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
4-Jun-09 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 2,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
29-May-09 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 24,000 | Automatic Sale $24.85 per share. | $596,400
29-May-09 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 24,000 | Option Exercise $4.81 per share. | $115,440
15-May-09 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 24,000 | Option Exercise $4.81 per share. | $115,440
15-May-09 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 24,000 | Automatic Sale $27 per share. | $648,000
5-Jun-08 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 8,000 | Acquisition | N/A
26-Mar-08 | CLONTZ STEVEN T | 18,448 | Option Exercise $5.69 per share. | $104,969
8-Apr-09 | ISAACS GARY D | 1,098 | Sale $26.24 per share. | $28,811
1-Jan-09 | ISAACS GARY D | 716 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $19,690
1-Jan-09 | ISAACS GARY D | 7,874 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
25-Sep-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 2,604 | Sale $25 per share. | $65,100
24-Sep-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 2,408 | Disposition $24.47 per share. | $58,923
29-Aug-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 10,000 | Option Exercise $3.75 per share. | $37,500
29-Aug-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 4,840 | Automatic Sale $26.56 per share. | $128,550
20-Mar-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 2,207 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
20-Mar-08 | ISAACS GARY D | 9,731 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
4-Jun-09 | KAMINS EDWARD | 2,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
5-Jun-08 | KAMINS EDWARD | 8,000 | Acquisition | N/A
3-Aug-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 28,590 | Option Exercise $9.60 - $13.19 per share. | N/A
3-Aug-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 28,590 | Automatic Sale $30 per share. | $857,700
24-Jul-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 30,000 | Option Exercise $7.75 per share. | $232,500
24-Jul-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 30,000 | Automatic Sale $28 per share. | $840,000
26-Jan-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 5,250 | Option Exercise $5.06 - $9.88 per share. | N/A
26-Jan-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 5,250 | Automatic Sale $32 per share. | $168,000
1-Jan-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 358 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $9,845
1-Jan-09 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 5,150 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
24-Dec-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 5,000 | Option Exercise $5.06 per share. | $25,299
24-Dec-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 5,000 | Automatic Sale $25.48 per share. | $127,400
15-Feb-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 1,278 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 234 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $5,122
14-Jan-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 751 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | KIERNAN BRIAN G | 1,344 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $31,355
24-Jul-09 | KRITZMACHER JOHN A | 2,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
5-Jun-09 | KRITZMACHER JOHN A | 6,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
29-Jan-09 | LEMMO MARK A | 20,000 | Automatic Sale $33 per share. | $660,000
26-Jan-09 | LEMMO MARK A | 20,000 | Automatic Sale $32 per share. | $640,000
1-Jan-09 | LEMMO MARK A | 358 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $9,845
1-Jan-09 | LEMMO MARK A | 6,179 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Feb-08 | LEMMO MARK A | 1,619 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | LEMMO MARK A | 331 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $7,245
14-Jan-08 | LEMMO MARK A | 1,118 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | LEMMO MARK A | 2,001 | Disposition $23.33 per share. |
9-Jul-09 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 493 | Disposition $23.18 per share. | $11,427
1-Jan-09 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 1,550 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $42,625
1-Jan-09 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 11,591 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
9-Jul-08 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 659 | Disposition $19.43 per share. | $12,804
20-Mar-08 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 5,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Feb-08 | MCQUILKIN SCOTT A | 740 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
3-Aug-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 12,500 | Option Exercise $9.60 per share. | $120,000
3-Aug-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 12,500 | Automatic Sale $30 per share. | $375,000
21-Jan-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 16,500 | Option Exercise $5.25 - $9.6 per share. | N/A
21-Jan-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 16,500 | Automatic Sale $30 per share. | $495,000
1-Jan-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 835 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $22,962
1-Jan-09 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 15,909 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
14-May-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 11,700 | Option Exercise $6 per share. | $70,200
14-May-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 11,700 | Automatic Sale $23.02 per share. | $269,334
5-May-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 1,320 | Disposition $20.96 per share. | $27,667
15-Feb-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 3,727 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 636 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $13,922
14-Jan-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 2,148 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
2-Jan-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 13,300 | Option Exercise $6 per share. | $79,800
2-Jan-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 13,300 | Automatic Sale $23.19 per share. | $308,427
1-Jan-08 | MERRITT WILLIAM J | 3,845 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $89,703
1-Jan-09 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 400 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $11,000
1-Jan-09 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 5,281 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Feb-08 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 1,362 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 266 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $5,822
14-Jan-08 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 771 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | MILLER WILLIAM C | 1,542 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $35,974
9-Oct-09 | NOLAN JAMES J | 20,000 | Sale $23.86 per share. | $477,200
16-May-09 | NOLAN JAMES J | 563 | Disposition $27.14 per share. | $15,279
1-Jan-09 | NOLAN JAMES J | 1,200 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $33,000
1-Jan-09 | NOLAN JAMES J | 8,369 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
16-May-08 | NOLAN JAMES J | 563 | Disposition $22.54 per share. | $12,690
20-Mar-08 | NOLAN JAMES J | 3,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Feb-08 | NOLAN JAMES J | 1,356 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | NOLAN JAMES J | 179 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $3,918
14-Jan-08 | NOLAN JAMES J | 447 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
21-Jan-09 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 7,200 | Option Exercise $9.60 - $12.4 per share. | N/A
21-Jan-09 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 7,200 | Automatic Sale $30 per share. | $216,000
11-Jan-09 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 397 | Disposition $27.33 per share. | $10,850
1-Jan-09 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 1,191 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $32,752
1-Jan-09 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 7,443 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
20-Mar-08 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 3,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
19-Mar-08 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 556 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
19-Mar-08 | POINT JANET MEENEHAN | 4,649 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
4-Jun-09 | ROATH ROBERT S | 2,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
5-Jun-08 | ROATH ROBERT S | 2,000 | Acquisition | N/A
5-Jun-08 | SHANER ROBERT W | 2,000 | Acquisition | N/A
18-Jan-09 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 1,153 | Disposition $26.73 per share. | $30,819
1-Jan-09 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 1,312 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $36,080
1-Jan-09 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 14,980 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Feb-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 1,543 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
18-Jan-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 986 | Disposition $21.18 per share. | $20,883
18-Jan-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 10,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
15-Jan-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 264 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $5,778
14-Jan-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 892 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
1-Jan-08 | SHAY LAWRENCE F | 1,597 | Disposition $23.33 per share. | $37,258
25-Sep-09 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 670 | Disposition $23.42 per share. | $15,691
23-Sep-09 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 2,354 | Sale $23.73 per share. | $55,860
4-Sep-09 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 198 | Disposition $21.89 per share. | $4,334
1-Jan-09 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 1,637 | Disposition $27.50 per share. | $45,017
1-Jan-09 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 4,877 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
4-Sep-08 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 198 | Disposition $26.44 per share. | $5,235
21-Mar-08 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 5,000 | Acquisition $0 per share. | N/A
20-Mar-08 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 31 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
20-Mar-08 | SPRECHER STEVEN WAYNE | 3,990 | Statement of Ownership | N/A
Carpenters price is not low. It has been consistant. Hr has the risk of nokia not sining priced in as well as the risk of new and existing lisceses not renewing. He had lowered his price by $3 last week because of the set back withe the commissiom. Understand he was one of the only analyst to predict the nokia fight to take this long. Also these are 12 month price targets and it is better to put in a conservative price and come up short than to saying SCREAMING BUY $50 a share and come up sound verying foolish.
That everyone at this company will look great in their dry cleaned suits that Harry has provided. Years ago TC called for Harry resignation and to replace him with a real executive who can contribute. He does not beleive in Harry's leadership and beleives that the only way for us to get real share value with Harry here is if the company sold.
Great, Harry got $4.2 Million dollars coming out of evey pocket of his freshly dry cleaned suit and you think TC has an agenda. See the man with the money in his pocket and a gun in his hand he is robbing the bank. See the man with the pen and notebook he is writing about it.
Now you understand what Michael was trying to do.I didn't understand it until now.I never figured out the poison pill and the staggered board worked against us. Many people accused him of trying to steal the company but he was really just trying to stop Harry from stealing it.
Are many people still against Corp_buyer trying again?
I may have his email somewhere.
I disagree, If they lost confidence the would be gone.
Carpenter or Nas would not waste their time writing reports or questioning management.
The fact is that sans Nokia, the licensing team has done a good job. They have brought in new money and kept EPS growing. Now the Nokia situation killed their street creditability. Especially when you start putting out 8K that substantial progress has benn made and 2 years later still no deal.
No one is even calling theam out on Nokia the problem is that with $429 mil cash and an $886 mil market cap the total value of this patent portfolio according to the street is $457 Million. This $457 million dollar company can generate $300 million in cash without Nokia, SNE and Mot.
They are both tired and frustrated (more NAZ then TC) by hearing the same old crap. Naz wants an aggressive buy back in place. The hell with Janet and her crappy statement on rules. It is more BS. Many blackout periods are self imposed. If they annouce an addition hunderd million along with completion to the first $100 that would be $175 million of money buying stock or at $20 a share $8.5 million bringing the float down to under 36 million shares. Now that .69 cents per share per quarter becomes .85 cents per share or $3.40 a year or a 5.5 PE. From a shareholder standpoint this is a no brainer.Also less shares to short and less shares to dump.
Also if they were to actually buy shares and stop selling them it would bring them down more.
Lastly I hate to say this because she is a very nice Lady and all but I wouldn't mide seeing Janet drive Harry to the airport when leaving this company.
If we had a COB who was dynamic and could get some real partnerships going the went out and got a head of IR who could actually convince money managers to invest we would we in great shape Nokia or no Nokia.
After 6 1/2 years of telling his clients that Nokia, SNE and Motorola is right around the corner I'm sure that TC is sick of the litagation story. The fact is both TC and Bill N know that the value of this company is worth more than the current MC OF $886 MILLION. Assume a 50% increase would be $1.3 billion or $30-$31 a share. Right now the numbers do not fit the value and this has not been a one time event. The share price has never been able to sustain a value under Harry's leadership. The message to Harry is just sell already so I can get the F*$K out of here. I'm tired of writing these reports.
Great I wish I was Mikey. 7 years on this board 2 plus on ragging bull and I've read everyone of the posts on here, RB and AB.
Posted by: jai Date: Monday, January 06, 2003 11:26:22 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 275858
I'm in.
Wow 1000 posts in a week. Looks like I've got a lot of catching up to do.
I had a 4 year break from posting because I was selling IDCC to clients.
Over the past 10 years Harry has used each licensing signing as a selling and granting opportunity for himslef. That is why after collecting $1.5 billion dollars in licensing fee shareholder value is only at $880 million. It is time for shareholders to focus and take back control of this company and demand that we be compensated. Unrigging Harry's Casio would be the best thing we can do for ourselves.
The problem is that we have always been told and assumed the the poison pill was in place to protect the shareholders. The fact is that what Corp_Buyer was trying to do was the exact oposite of what you just said. Theo nly way we can get taken over on the cheap is if the poison pill and staggered board remain in place and Harry gets a deal in the best interest of Harry. Corp_Buyer was trying to level the playing field so if MSFT or CSCO came knocking the bids that they would come with would bring our value up. Understand one of the reasons for the $20 share price is the knowledge by investors that this company can not be taken out.
Yeah, we are doing so much better under Harry.
What Corp_Buyer was trying to do was simply expose Harry's world. If these invesntion are worth $2 to $4 billion or $45 to $90 a share we won't see that value in our lifetimes. Sad to say mschere didn't. Harry has got this game rigged. Like playing poker at a crooked casino. The poison pill and the staggered board fend off all possible technologies companies that would otherwise be looking at IDCC as a potential takeover or investment. Hell MSFT and CSCO have about $90 billion is short term money. They could pay $2 billion without even blinking an eye.
So the argrument is that they would get then company on the cheap and Harry is protecting us. The only thing Harry is protecting is his RSU piggy bank and again my belief is he has instructed his management team to hold onto the cash so he can take the company public and use our cash to buy the company for himself.
I LIKED HIM and thought he had this management group cold.
I'll take a buyout of $50 abd Corp could get that deal for us
Sounds like we all fell asleep in the begining of the decade and while we were sleeping IDCC created a butch of millionaires. LOLL
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 4:02:58 PM
In reply to: rmarchma who wrote msg# 164960 Post # of 275815
We are in agreement, "the total number of shares reserved for outstanding awards and available for future awards under all compensatory plans of the Company will be approximately 13,923,258 or 26% of the shares outstanding on April 4, 2000. " and that was PRIOR to the 2002 ISO expansion of 2M shares and the RSU plan expansion of 1.5M shares.
I think most of those initial ~14M shares back in 2000 fall under the "available for future awards" category. What say you?
MO,
Corp_Buyer
More history lessons for our newer members
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Thursday, September 07, 2006 11:33:21 AM
In reply to: lastchoice who wrote msg# 166749 Post # of 275813
Heartland posted publicly on their website the word "greed" in connection with their vote against management's request for more ISO options in 2003, as I recall.
More recently, Heartland posted something about management, especially our CoB, being richly rewarded while shareowners suffered an endless stream of litigations and arbitrations with our largest customers.
Maybe some else saved the exact language posted by Heartland for these items and will repost it here? These items were posted here on IHub as I recall so they may be found via a search of this board, if you care to take the time to do so.
MO,
Corp_Buyer
Music to my ears....
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 3:57:42 PM
In reply to: Corp_Buyer who wrote msg# 164953 Post # of 275812
My overall point is that in far less than 10 years, our management has blown through most of the original ~14 million shares plus expanded the ISO plan by 2 million shares, expanded the RSU plan with an additional 1.5 million shares, invented the very expensive LTCP Plan, increased salaries significantly, continued the Regular Bonus Plan, granted extraordinary compensation, and now has invented the 3X RSU payout under the guise of new long term performance targets.
Recall that back in 2003 shareholders denied a compensation increase and ISS deemed the "compensation system" to be excessive based on objective peer based analysis, and that was all before top management blew through the ISO plans and invented the very expensive LTCP.
MO,
Corp_Buyer
THe more things change the more they stay the same.
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Sunday, August 20, 2006 3:28:37 AM
In reply to: Danny Detail who wrote msg# 165300 Post # of 275810
"totally qualified to critique..compensation" - Danny, do you believe ...
* Tom Carpenter is qualified to call for HC's resignation in favor of a more industry connected Chm?
* ISS is qualified to conclude that the "compensation system" at IDCC is excessive, based on their independent and in depth peer based analysis?
* The majority of voting thinking caring shareholders is qualified to deny management's request for 5M more ISO shares?
* That our largest institutional investor is qualified to refer to management "greed"?
* The independent compensation study by Dr. Ira-Kay at Watson Wyatt Worldwide, entitled "Stock Option Overhang-Shareholder Boon or Shareholder Burden?" concluding that the amount of ISO grants, such as we have at IDCC, result in a "dilution effect" that far outweighs any "incentive effect"? (FYI- Watson Wyatt, www.watsonwyatt.com, is a global consulting firm focused on human capital and financial management)
* The majority of voting thinking caring shareholders is qualified to recommend a declassified BoD 2 years in a row?
* That ISS is qualified to conclude that HC is an affiliated and not a completely independent outside director?
* That ISS is qualified to recommend a vote of "withhold" on HC's reelection?
"I can't believe the arrogance of..." posters like you who proclaim the expertise of analysts and institutional investors unless they disagree with your completely baseless views.
At least I agree with the majority of thinking, caring, open minded voting shareholders and very well qualified compensation and corporate governance experts, analysts, and institutional investors.
MO,
Corp_Buyer
We need this guy back.
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:44:07 PM
In reply to: olddog967 who wrote msg# 165256 Post # of 275805
"They were not subject to any incentive change", meaning the number of RSU shares would not change. However, there was, presumably, incentive for the grant recipients to increase the value of those RSU shares and therefore our shares in the company.
Under the latest self serving scheme, for the same company performance, management will now get 300% more payoff on those exchanged RSUs shares than before, at increased cost to shareholders.
This is another significant and unnecessary compensation increase, as though the LTCP was not expensive enough already.
Recall that the LTCP plan in its entirety was created by top management AFTER the independent peer-based compensation analysis by ISS concluded that the "compensation system" at IDCC was excessive and also AFTER shareholders voted to deny management's request for a compensation increase in the form of 5M more ISO shares.
It STINKS.
MO,
We need this guy back.
Posted by: Corp_Buyer Date: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:44:07 PM
In reply to: olddog967 who wrote msg# 165256 Post # of 275805
"They were not subject to any incentive change", meaning the number of RSU shares would not change. However, there was, presumably, incentive for the grant recipients to increase the value of those RSU shares and therefore our shares in the company.
Under the latest self serving scheme, for the same company performance, management will now get 300% more payoff on those exchanged RSUs shares than before, at increased cost to shareholders.
This is another significant and unnecessary compensation increase, as though the LTCP was not expensive enough already.
Recall that the LTCP plan in its entirety was created by top management AFTER the independent peer-based compensation analysis by ISS concluded that the "compensation system" at IDCC was excessive and also AFTER shareholders voted to deny management's request for a compensation increase in the form of 5M more ISO shares.
It STINKS.
MO,
Do they care?
I've seen this act before. Management as in COB as way too much power. They beleive they can do whatever they want. Issue RSU's, hold cash, keep sharehollders in the dark.
Still can't beleive they got the 3 million share incentive plan off but too late now.
I think we also need to be balanced here. I want to make ensure that this team is focused on shareholder value but also realizing that Merrit has done a great job in getting everyone but Nokia to the table. Hell, the only reason we have $430 million in cash is because of the licensing team so let's not paint these guys all with "YOU SUCK" banners. I do separate Merrit and the people who actually do work from Harry and his bottomless RSU grants. All those in favor of granting us RSU's say "I". The "I"'s have.
Without allowing the companies stock price to be bid up by say MSFT, CISCO or Apple to take the company private will require votes by the shareholders. The Board simple has to vote on an acceptable bid and make sure they have enough shares lined up to get it passed.
+11111111111111111111111111111111
Bob, Best post I've read in a long time.
I wonder if it is legal or practical to assign proxies to Heartland or to Bill Nasgovitz personally. That could be a way to have some clout at the ASM without being there in person and would send a pretty strong message.
Bill may be the shareholders only friend. Unbeleivable great idea giving Bill N. the ammunition of millions of shares and thousands of voices to foil Harry plan to take the company private. I'd love to hear from Bill N on what options we may have and what proposals should be put in place before the end of December deadline for voting at the ASM.
Remember a few years ago Corp Buyer was tar'd and feathered here for suggestioning changes to the corporate structure. I think he knew what was going on. I also think he had a proposal voted on that lost. I think I have his email somewhere.
My feeling is that a board freindly takeover will shrew the shareholders where the sun don't shine.
Does Harry really want a higher stock price?
My thoughts are sans Nokia deal Harry would like to keep a lid ob the stock price and that is the real reason for the lack of the share buy back.
If he puts together a group that can use the companies cash and produce a low ball offer he gets to have the company private with no more share holders and no more questions from pesky fund managers. Also no more limits on his piggy back. Free cash flow for years to come that go directly into his pocket.
Understand with a poison pill in place and a staggered board no one can take this company over without the approval of Harry. Now if they come in with a $28-$30 a share offer to go private, Harry says great just come up with $850 million and we will use the other $450 Million in cash and we will get $200 million in free cash flow for years to come. Hell, cut expenses by not have an IR department, don't need one when their are no investors.
Well, it's a very low rate. I mean, it's somewhere between 0.5% and 1%, and the reason for that is because we keep it in very safe, very liquid, very short-term type of investments.
Bill Nasgovitz - Heartland Advisors
Okay.
Scott McQuilkin
Basically we had next to no losses over the last couple of years, so that's the good news. The bad news is yeah, the rates are low for right now.
Bill Nasgovitz - Heartland Advisors
Okay. I appreciate that. Well, Bill, getting back to your previous statement, trying to achieve the highest value to shareholders. Just a couple comments. With the stock trading at essentially at below $20 a share, and estimates I've got a 250 estimate. Maybe you're going to do it for the year. We'll see, but if so, that's an 8 PE, about a third of what QUALCOMM is selling at, but an earnings yield of 12.5%, I'm a bit puzzled by why you don't think that that's a very extremely attractive return for shareholders?
Also it was very good that the company restructured the long term incentive plan to reduce quarterly expenses. Maybe they are starting to get it.
No it is not a fact.
Their are thousand and thousand of funds that can buy IDCC stock. I pitched it to dozens of fund managers. Domestic Funds are normally divided into Large cap Value, Large cap growth, Mid cap value, Mid cap growth, small cap value and growth. Hell I even asked Janet for a job to sell IDCC to the street. I'm real glad I got turned down.
Value managers look for dividends, growth managers look for growth. Large cap managers will not buys stocks under a certain market capitalization regardless whether they pay dividents or not.
I'm for a buy back. Less shares around means more stable hands. Lie Bill said, Hell spend $200 mil and buy 10 million shares, Gotta love this guy.
Also they want better behavior from management. Did you hear Bill N today? Why do tech companies with large debt loads that earn pennies per share get PE's of 30, 40, 50 ,60? Now most of the problem is in litagation risk but now you have the top covering analyst and the largest institutional holder call into question managements personal and public commitment to the shareholders by not putting their money or the companies money into the stock.
The term is Drunken Sailor and that title is held by the illustrious Rich Fagen. I think that that is one of the reasons they have been overly cautious with the buy back. When bookkeeper Rich got his hands on Nokia $253 million he went thru it like a fist full of dollars in a hooker house.
IDCC was buying for about a year in the 30's and when the money was gone, hello 20's. Good old Rich did alright for himself. Pocketing and selling tons of shares for his ability to read a printed document on a conference call.
I still like and believe Merrit. Signing Pantech and Cinterion was a great move. Merrit has never shown me anything but being an honest hard workking CEO. He played his hand and lost but he still has a lot of chips left. I think he will get this done with Nokia. Nokia might want Harry's head on a silver platter and I say give it to them. If getting rid of Harry will get Nokia signed, do it. Heel do it anyway.
It is clear to everyone that this patent portfolio has at least a $2 billion dollar valuation which equates to $45+ a share. Who cares about Apple, they are paying and we are maling money.
What I'd lie to see is if Merrit can remove the E in the MEN and leave Motorola and Nokia as MN. That would be worth his wealth in RSU's.
All in all a good day for us shareholders. Bill N told IDCC to shop sh$ting on our heads. I was laughing so hard. I've never heard an analyst or fund manager curse on a call and I counted 3 from him. It was well worth the price of admission.
Venture funds like for the startup management teams to be hungry. This is not a venture or a start up management team but a small cap that has remained a small cap for years.
What happens when people get fat. You need more food to get fulfilled. Harry and oompany got fat so they got greedy. It wasn't said but I'm sure he was not happy with IDCC buying back only $25 million in stock and good old Harry selling $4.2 million in stock. Kind of like the scence fro Goodfellows where they bring in stuff from in the front door while the mobsters pull everything out the back door.
Now the Good news .....
MY New Hero!!!!
Wow, what a great call. Bill N is pissed and he is not pulling any punches.
It is simple. If IDCC wins the ITC we are sitting at $45 a share and everyone is singing management praises with tons of atta-boy's.
Well they didn't and now Bill N took them out to the public tool shed and whacked them. It was f'en Great.
Understand what the buy back does. It doesn't just reduce the float it protects shareholders when people are dumping insane amount of shares on the market like last Monday. We had no stock support period. Not 20, not 19 and barely got to $18.50. Hell if the earning were another week who knows what the share price would be.
In a nutshell he was pissed because they sat on $433 million in cash while the shares were crashing. If the management team doesn't beleive in the stock thru buying shares why should fund managers?
I oved the part about them taing in tons of cash, investing it while shareholders lose money. It was a thing of beauty.
cont...
Still in favor on an increase in the buyback.
With roughly 43 million shares outstanding another 100 mill brings it down to 38 million. This stock has been roller coastered for years. Reducing the float, in my opinion, leaves less shares for sale, less shares to short and maybe less downside volitivity.
It is clear from the price and the 10 million share dump last Monday that funds are scared to hold onto IDCC. These shares need to get into stable hands. Let's see what the price action is tomorrow. I'd like to hear some new voices on the call. They need to get some equity managers to start buying. Hopefully some of the analysts or funds that cover Apple will pop up here.
Also, I'd like to see if the call goes the full hour. That means lots of questions and interest and not just TC with repeat questions.
Here is to hoping that today was the last day IDCC spends in the teens, FOREVER!!!!!!!!
I'm not qualified to be the CEO or COB of a wireless company but I don't feel harry is either. That being said this stock needs repair.
I'm not going to single out IDCC for not aligning the company to be in line with shareholders value because I think very few companies do this. I think corporate executives as a group have a very large me-first mentality. So they all make sure that they are obscenly compensated and then worry about the shareholders.
This is a small cap growth company. In my opinion small cap growth managers are not looking at dividends that is why heartland always asks about buy back. Buy backs reduce the float. At $18.94 a share this should be a very good investment for the company so I would expand the buy back another $100 million.
The instruments in place like the poison pill and the staggered board of directors are in place to protect managements control of this company so getting rid of these would allow for the company to be aligned more with shareholder value.
Having the poison pill in place along with the staggered board is a red flag signal for institutional investors to stay away for IDCC.
A staggered board of directors or classified board is a practice governing the board of directors of a company, corporation, or other organization in which the members of the board of directors are elected a few at a time, with different groups of directors having overlapping multi-year terms, instead of en masse (where all directors have one-year terms). Each group of directors falls within a specified "class"—e.g., Class I, Class II, etc.—hence the use of the term "classified" board.
In publicly held companies, staggered boards have the effect of making hostile takeover attempts more difficult. When a board is staggered, hostile bidders must win more than one proxy fight at successive shareholder meetings in order to exercise control of the target firm. Particularly in combination with a poison pill, a staggered board that cannot be dismantled or evaded is one of the most potent takeover defenses available to U.S. companies. [1]
Institutional shareholders are increasingly calling for an end to staggered boards of directors -- also called "declassifying" the boards. The Wall Street Journal reported in January of 2007 that 2006 marked a key switch in the trend toward declassification or annual votes on all directors: more than half (55%) of the S&P 500 companies have declassified boards, compared with 47% in 2005. [2]
Staggered boards can provide leadership security and continuity. Similar staggering of terms are used for that reason in the election of U.S. Senators, members of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and other public bodies. By design, they have the effect of limiting control of a representative body (a board of directors, the Senate, the SEC, etc.) by the body being represented (shareholders, voters, the President).
Synonym: classified board. "Under this provision, the board is divided into separate classes, usually three, with directors serving overlapping multiyear terms. Thus, apporximately one-third of all directos stand for election each year, and each director is reelected roughly once every three years." [3]