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.
Does options expiring tomorrow play into it too?
As for googs forward guidance... I think it would be just the opposite. I think they'll want to wait until after their earnings and guidance are reported. That way they'll have a whole quarter for it to become news from3 moths ago. If they include it now, The settlement/buyout would be practically front page material about them... something I think they'd probably want to minimize.
I thought the John Ford SA article... and the Asia instablog article... both talked about Vrng stating that Vrng would keep 80% as pure profit. And in their calculations it looked like they took that to mean that 20% would cover costs n such and 80% would be returned to the PPS. Here are the articles with their calculations:
John's SA article: (July 23rd 2012)
http://seekingalpha.com/article/739841-google-settlement-could-drive-vringo-shares-above-30
The Asia24 instablog article: (Oct 6th 2012)
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/2163521-asia24/1147131-vringo-shares-will-quintuple-from-5-and-eventually-hit-50
Am I reading their intent wrong?
Then you'd have to include that Vrng has already said that some further dilution would occur when the PPS reaches higher levels between $4.35 and $30. They didn't stipulate how much more dilution or at exactly what interim levels. But that statement came from the last dilution documents. Of course I think it would be difficult to add this level of future dilution ambiguity into a spreadsheet.
I read these 6 form 4s. The 6 individuals sold a combined amount of approx 25,000 shares. Out of a combined ownership of millions of shares.
Ken Lang sold 14,558 shares, and is left with ONLY 2,973,926 shares after the sale.
The other 5 sellers sold somewhere around 10,000 shares combined.
________
If I'd sold 14,558 shares it would have significantly dented my holding. I doubt Lang noticed it in his portfolio.
Everyone thought the PPS would probably suffer as the short term quick buck traders left with no settlement yet and the trial underway. It was helped lower by shorters like you, and the over abundant spew of negativity and untruths your monkeys are providing for entertainment in the YMB.
sexyST - I sent you PM about bear raid info
Apparently because this Ungar fellow will say whatever you want him to say, for the right price.
I'm doing my part to keep the PPS up.
Whenever I do a limit order a couple cents lower than current PPS, the PPS refuses to drop low enough for the buy to take place.
Your welcome.
Investing at 19 is impressive.
But I'm not sure I'd call this investing. More like making a pretty good poker bet where the pot odds are easily in your favor.
Def better than 50% to win, where the reward def outweighs the risk, and could outweigh it by a very wide margin depending on settlement or trial outcome.
So Ravicher there for the trial... And is sitting through all of it... but per his blog he doesn't own any vrng (or goog) ???
How's this for strategic negotiations.
For settlement Vrng asks for the same $493 million... but plus 2.5% royalties (not 3.5%)... and we won't sue your clients.
Then Vrng makes damn sure the clients know the specifics of the settlement offer.
Then we'd have Goog's own clients fighting for us to get Goog to agree to a settlement!!! Sounds like a winner to me.
Remember, the jury is also being told that Lang originally wrote those patents. He left Lycos and the patents stayed with Lycos. He bought them back last year and ...
Tweets from following @danravicher:
__________________________________
Tweets
10m Daniel B. Ravicher ?@danravicher
Exactly! "@bobabouey: @BMS212 Most courts do not permit electronic devices for spectators, so his silence probably means he is in court."
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite
16m Daniel B. Ravicher ?@danravicher
$VRNG v $GOOG concluded for day after opening statements. Trial back on at 10am. VRNG asked for $493M. GOOG argues they paid $3.2M last yr.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite
4h Daniel B. Ravicher ?@danravicher
@dschorrnyc no, that juror was not stricken for cause or preemptory. I'm telling you who IS on the jury, not the 33 not selected.
_________________________________
Note what he said about $493 million. I assume that after you add in royalties at 3.5% the amount would be substantially higher.
I wasn't trying to disagree with you. I was only mentioning something I read that I thought might be somewhat pertinent. Whether it's 95% or 86% the ones that settle are still the huge majority.
I agree with your primary point:
- "My only true point was, and it IS a fact that most cases settle, that VRNG did NOT settle, is in trial, and is thus in a minority any way you look at it."
With one exception.... hasn't settled yet. It could still happen.
If Goog loses they will of course appeal. I think I read that an appeal process here could take at most one year.
I'm not sure that 97% (or 95%) number was ever the right % for vrng. In one of SteveKimLaw's articles, Marpha commented about what she viewed as truer percentages for settlement. Based on studies done at University of Houston Law Center Institute for Intellectual Property and Information Law. Follow the link near the end of this post to read her blog article about more realistic percentages for settlement.
Marpha & I are both long vrng.
I'm just trying to read everything, stay informed, and keep realistic expectations.
_________________________
The SteveKimLaw article:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/907231-vringo-vs-google-45-million-evens-the-playing-field?source=yahoo
_________________________
Marpha's comment that I referred to:
It is a bit inaccurate to say that "Google must offer a settlement sum that is reasonably related to the actual infringement damages claimed in the case." Google doesn't *have* to do anything of the kind. They can also simply tell Vringo to pound sand, pure and simple.
The fact the Vringo issued more stock was a necessity for them--so that they can continue to operate as a business with the prospect of a prolonged litigation with Google. Couching the new offering as purely motivated by the prospect of an impending settlement is misleading. Vringo management is smart--with the recent run up, this was simply the most advantageous time to raise more money. I applaud them for that.
Sure, it helps them in settlement negotiations to the extent that Google is inclined to settlement at this juncture. But, I would say that the rationale put forth by most for why Google is certain to settle are a bit overblown. Look at Google's record of settlement--they don't do it. And Larry Page equates patent trolls with terrorists. Look at his first blog post upon taking over as CEO. Was Larry's decision to withdraw from China in Google's best commercial business interest? Absolutely not. And, in fact, it was that internal debate that led Larry to take over from Eric Schmidt. Google has a history of putting principles before profit. And in this case, it is not clear to anyone watching this patent litigation that Vringo's case in court is assured. Google has mounted a more than adequate defense strategy.
And, if you think settlement is all but guaranteed, looks at the statistics:
http://goo.gl/O6YSG
I'm long VRNG as well. And I will most likely be ready to take peoples' shares after October 9--just at a lower price.
_________________________
Good morning and GLTA
Waiting anxiously hoping for positive reports from the frontlines
I agree. I'm long vrng and have been for a while now. But I expected the hit on Tues (same as Rain) and I sold a bunch then and bought back in lower (same as Rain). I think he got all the way out and then back in. I sold a bunch but kept a 20k block, then upped it again substantially later.
I expected a hit today for what I said in my last post. And I again sold a bunch but kept a 20k block minimum. And am now buying back in lower to hold across the weekend.
Players saw what the dilution news did Tues with help from negative hype from the shorts.
Right now there's the concern that lower US numbers from Goog means lower damages but no one knows how much lower. So they're waiting to see the share price drop from that... before considering if they want to buy more or not. And just like Tues the shorts are jumping back in at a pivotal time posting in mass and under multiple aliases to push the share price around as much as possible.
I think it could drop a bit more but prob not as low as 4.25, because later people will want back in before the weekend. Then it should pick up before the close as people want to be holding it over the weekend.
I have to wonder how much of the case could be open. This whole case revolves around Goog's underlying search technology... and they might not want their source code and specific search technology made available to the public and competing companies. That aspect could close the doors for a major part of this case. At least that's what I think.
Just back,
If they settle right now... then Goog would not have to show the court the real US financials. But I think Goog is prob plenty comfortable giving those numbers to the court, esp if they can be sealed to only court eyes.
As for IRS. I'm sure IRS already had the true US numbers.
It might be that Goog posting untrue inflated numbers... may have helped bolster their stock. I can't think of any other reason why they would have posted inflated numbers out there. If that were the case then the true numbers could hurt if analysts were before told to use the inflated US numbers, and the SEC might not like it either. But Goog will prob ask for the new US info that they have to provide to Vrng and the court to be sealed.
But as far as we are concerned... I truly doubt that Goog will settle right away just because they'd rather not give true numbers to the court. Much more likely it's just a quick (sealed) court document and move on.
To me it feels right that it should be trading in a tight range today. Shorties look for more volatile stocks and attempt to push volatility higher in predictable ways using shorting on the down side of the spectrum.
But the $4.35 dilution halps put a floor under this stock. And the lowered US Goog numbers helps to lower the ceiling somewhat... making for less volatility and tougher for shorties to push it around in a predictable manner. And with less shorty shoving comes tighter trading range. For now...
Well it begs the question as to why Goog published completely incorrect US numbers to begin with. Were they trying to hype their numbers to keep their stock price up? If so, then they probably don't want to disclose factual numbers that might make them look bad to SEC and analysts. So they'd prob want to keep them sealed. But that aside...
I think Goog let vrng use incorrect numbers on purpose. Goog prob should have told court much sooner that the underlying Goog US financial numbers were off. But they let vrng come up with a claim first and then told the court about the incorrect numbers so that the claim would get reduced late in the game.
But back to my original question. I doubt that Goog cares that much about disclosing new US numbers to the court. Especially if they can keep them sealed. So I doubt that these numbers will force Goog to settle/buyout b4 disclosing these numbers. I tend to think any settle/buyout would occur right b4 trial or during.
Long time reader, first time poster. With a question...
I bought several 10k blocks back around $3.30. And to summarize my thinking, I tend to agree with posts from rainmaker and crew. Now that the madness is taking a break...
Hey, Several posters on the yahoo board and here seem to believe that Google won't want to open their financial books to the court, and so they think Google will settle/buyout b4 that. And that this will push the vrng stock higher today, and should push for a decent offer from Google very very soon. But I'm not sure there is any meat to this line of thought.
What do you guys think?