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.
Assumption is they are always right however I gave 2 examples of situations today in my previous post where they got roasted, happens all the time.
Add Kerx to my list shorts increased 28% to 18% of float, today up 10% (135% intra-day) Almost every big mover has a high % of float shorted you will find.
Not sure, If you look at all the stocks on the NYSE MKT system, number 3 is Vringo and number 4 is VHC. In terms of short a percentage of float who is 1 and 2? VHC number 1 36% of float and Vringo #2 with 22.5%. So it is obvious that "street" as a whole hates these patent type companies. However take heart as I said before shorts are not always right. Two companies on my radar today both benefited from large short positions
First Sarepta SRPT shorts increased 12.5% to 7.6 million (26.3% of float) and today we had a 13% move (intra-day 18%) so some pain there with more to come.
Second we have First Solar 27.3% of float and we got a nice 45% move there. Shorts got burned there as well. The conditions are right here for these type of moves given similar % of float shorted. Will it happen stay tuned.
Want to know why this stock moves in the classic stair step pattern that demonstrates manipulation
look at the recent short data: +644,943 ==> 15,913,760
Vringo, Inc. Common Stock VRNG 15,913,760 15,268,817 644,943 4.2 22.5 8 2,067,074
As I said I am not seeking your approval, many agree with me also...
Since no one knows for sure one can only speculate. Markets are made of competing opinions. You and others assign a near zero probability, all I am saying is that this is probable, you don't have to agree.
Thank You this is my point, there are battles in every space between the two companies and their allies.
Collect a royalty cheque from Google. There is no love lost between the two companies. In a recent interview Steve Ballmer couldn't even say Google's name, he called them "the competitor". Don't underestimate egos here in the clash of the titans. The cost is insignificant but the leverage against Google even though it's minor would be priceless to Microsoft.
One last point , why did Microsoft decide to engage in settlement talks before final ruling?
What if Microsoft wants to buy the patents? Google would have to deal with Microsoft and write them cheques. I disagree with you that a deal with MSFT of 10% as you say would have no impact on the judges decision or Google. They are willfully infringing here and JJ will factor this into his RR numbers. He has increased penalties in the past under these circumstances
thanks tobinator useful information! Hard to guess whether the number increased I say yes....
using Mac no viruses detected...here
Hallelujah.....nice price action...
Thanks JJ...
Vringo Could be added to Russell 2000 Index
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1326521-trades-to-profit-from-the-coming-russell-2000-rebalancing?source=yahoo
Due to some legal risks, this is not an official Pipeline Data R2K pick. However, barring a disaster, we believe Vringo will be added to the Russell 2000. For those of you who enjoy a little extra risk, this one might be for you.
Vringo has been a hotly contested stock ever since James Altucher wrote his controversial article on "Why Google Might Be Going to $0". The excitement began when Vringo merged with I/P Engine, which purchased a series of Internet-related patents from Lycos. The merged entity is now in the process of suing Google (GOOG) and others from infringement.
The stock spiked after the article surfaced. By the time Russell did its 2012 evaluation, Vringo's valuation had more than doubled to $40 million, but not enough to be added to the R2K. Later, the company raised a substantial sum of money, increasing its total shares outstanding to over 80 million. Thus, its market cap is now more than enough to gain entry into this year's Russell.
With 20% of its total shares short (and over 30% of its effective float), VRNG is susceptible to a short squeeze. We're sitting this one out, but for more risk-minded investors, being added to the Russell could serve as a spark ahead of Russell Investment's official announcement.
Yes that is correct. In fact they have not really filed appeals but an application to appeal which can be withdrawn (according to JJ on Investors Hub). So it is standard procedure. My response was ragarding a posters comment
reminder G asked the Court to first rule on the other motions would give an opportunity to negotiate post-judgment royalties themselves
Robin No need to apologize you are entitled to your opinion, it is just as valid as anyone else. Since no on can predict the future except by fortunate circumstance there is no reason to defend what you said. You have every right and the fact that some don't agree does not matter.
Cheers and stay positive
Another example of the rivalry between MSFT and GOOG.
Bing’s SEO Tag Gag
Bing’s other April Fools’ joke aims at the funny bone. And the SEO community.
It’s an announcement of a new “SEO tag” – a piece of code that lets webmasters tell Bing where their pages should rank because “it’s time you take control of not just your SEO work, but of your rankings as well!” Hehe. Nice. Here’s what the (fake) code looks like:
bing-seo-tag
The second line of code tells Bing to make sure your page ranks one spot higher than your competition.
I probably should’ve said this joke is “mostly” aimed at the funny bone, because there’s also a dig at Google in this announcement. Bing says one of the reasons for the new SEO tag is that the company has “seen the positive feedback generated by this desire to partner with websites, instead of keeping them in the dark about important data by blocking it or not sharing it.”
Bing is referring there to Google’s [not provided] keyword referrals — data that Google has only been sharing with AdWords advertisers since October 2011.
We’ll keep an eye on Bing and update this post if they launch any more April Fools’ Day jokes … at Google’s expense or not.
It's all about Microsoft. Some see the settlement comments are mere licensing of Lang's technology but whatever the deal is it also involves Yahoo, since Bing powers Yahoo search. I have also researched how much Microsoft detests Google. There is a rivalry here. These comments are in reference to Microsoft/Yahoo' search alliance.
Listen to these comments, Balmer can't even say Google's name in a commentary:
And he expects that opposition to be lead by Google, though apparently he is unable to say Google’s actual name unless Walt Mossberg works magic upon his mind. He just kept saying “competition” today:
We’ll certainly face — we suspect we’ll face some opposition from the competitor [GOOGLE] — I would say competitors but it’s really the competitor who may not like more competition, because we actually think this is one of these cases where us coming together will actually provide more effective competition to the market leader, not less. So, certainly we would expect the competitor to be aggressive.
There will not be a buyout and there will not be a Google settlement.
But the only way VRNG moves on this specific issue is if some rumor is started or some form of announcement is made.
Nothing makes me more confident than when there is a debate on the possibility. Since no one can predict future events the likelihood of either events is possible. There is no bias in either direction. Some will view it as impossible and some the opposite, this creates interest and potential volatility which is what I want, bring it on.
I posted and answer to this question on Stocktwits for you. Where is the evidence that Google is negotiating? Vringo's post decision response says they are willfully infringing and there is no indication they are negotiating, if there were the timing of the appeals by both parties would have been delayed similar to the Microsoft situation.
Lets just sit back and watch how it plays out....
Where does this number come from?
Seriously you don't think once people find out there is a takover in progress Vringo's share price goes up a lot? You can't keep these things hidden. It won't work the price will rise and Vringo will find a white knight(maybe Microsoft). I haven't looked into this but most companies have provisions for hostile takeovers..
Most hostile takeover attempts in the U.S. involve litigation. The target
corporation may be able to stop, or at least slow, the takeover contest, allowing it to pursue
alternative strategies to address stock price vulnerabilities or alternative transactions with
friendlier counter-parties. The potential acquirer may need to enjoin the use of anti-takeover
statutes and defensive measures adopted by the target corporation or to clear the way to take the
offer to the shareholders. Both sides may seek venue advantages, prompting a “race to the
courthouse” when a hostile acquisition attempt becomes clear.
The Rules Governing Takeover Attempts and Responses
There are two general regulatory schemes governing hostile takeover attempts in
the U.S.: Federal law (which applies in all fifty states) is most concerned with disclosure and
timing issues, although specific areas of federal law (notably antitrust) are also important. The
law of the state of incorporation for the target company imposes specific statutory and common
law duties that govern the conduct of the contests and the conduct of target management.
The Act is primarily concerned with providing adequate information in a timely
fashion, and ensuring a level playing field for the participants.
• Section 13(d) requires disclosure of substantial share acquisitions by
individuals or groups, who generally must disclose the percentage of shares held in concert and the purpose of the acquisition when the threshold of 5% is passed
You can read more here:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:c5_OyXDPA14J:www.cov.com/files/Publication/8b0df18b-780d-48f1-ac0a-2fb9941a879f/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/f22c1948-3f76-40dc-a7de-30b7b1032aac/oid6533.PDF+&hl=en&gl=ca
The question for you is this. What happens once Google discloses a 5% ownership..do you think it will be anywhere near $3?
This is ridiculous quite frankly. The condition has already been satisfied , the consequence(s) we are going to find out, so it is invalid. The statement has no value enough said.
I didn't say "If Google IS found to infringe", I said "If Google WAS found to infringe". The WAS meaning that the event has already happened
Your opinions are just that. Since you are not privy to any discussions that Vringo is involved in you are speculating based on what you think is appropriate. Since Vringo has nothing worth acquiring in your eyes, may I ask if you own this stock? I can't imagine a person being long here with this attitude. You state
"the purpose of settling this early is to minimize their exposure to possible judgement."
That's the smart move because Microsoft knows that if Google was found to infringe, then there is zero question that Microsoft will be found to infringe as well
Vringo has asked the court to order the defendants to pay ongoing running royalties for their infringement of its patents from Nov. 20, 2012, until April 4, 2016, the patents' expiration dates, or when the defendants cease infringement of the patents.
The company has thus requested the court rate the defendants' ongoing royalty rate to 7%, arguing that these companies' ongoing patent infringement is willful.
Just speculating on MSFT here. What if the settlement discussions are not simply about the Lang patents and Bing's infringement. What if the deal gets bigger. Sometimes, using a sports analogy you go in with a certain player in mind and you end up making a blockbuster multi-player deal simply because the discussion moved in that direction. So back to Microsoft they could end up purchasing the Lang patents which would be a major deal or they could go even further and buy the company and run it as their Patent division. Where would this leave Google? Their fight would now be with Microsoft. Same with ZTE. This is one reason why being short here does not make sense. Taking the base case of settling the patent dispute, this will boost Vrngo's price, the third scenario buyout will bring the share price to another level. These are just scenarios and probabilities but they are not improbable. Food for thought.
Why Tuesday or Wednesday and not Monday or Thursday?
Ben Fox Rubin of the WSJ likes to use this statement every chance he gets.
By Ben Fox Rubin
Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) is in talks with small technology firm Vringo Inc. (VRNG) to settle a patent suit Vringo filed against the tech giant earlier this year, according to a recently filed court document.
Vringo, which focuses on mobile technology and intellectual property, sued Microsoft in January over its use of technology covered by the same two patents it referenced in a suit it won against Google Inc. (GOOG) and others last year.
In a court document dated Wednesday, a pretrial conference for the Microsoft suit was postponed to June from April, after Vringo disclosed to the judge settlement discussions were taking place.
Vringo declined to comment and a Microsoft representative wasn't immediately available for comment.
Vringo's shares jumped 16% to $3.20, while Microsoft was up 0.3% to $28.45.
Vringo had sued Google--the primary defendant--as well as AOL Inc. (AOL), IAC/InterActiveCorp. (IACI) and others, alleging infringement of two of its patents used to select and position advertising on Internet-search results. It won about $30 million in damages and was granted future royalties from the suit, which have been estimated to be valued at several hundreds of millions of dollars.
That case remains in its post-trial phase. Google has suggested it will appeal, saying it would ultimately win the case.
In the new suit, Vringo alleged Microsoft had willfully infringed the two patents with its search engine, Bing.com.
Write to Ben Fox Rubin at ben.rubin@dowjones.com
You realize that this is not a recent statement. It is a statement Google made in November and the author used it in the WSJ story yesterday.
Here is the November story notice the quoted words are identical to the words in the current story. I doubt very much anyone called Google and they used exactly the same words.
Vringo Awarded $30 Million in Trial Against Google, AOL
Vringo Inc. (VRNG), owner of technology developed by the Lycos Inc. search engine, said it was awarded about $30 million from Google Inc. and some Google customers, including AOL Inc. (AOL), over patented ways to generate advertising revenue.
The companies infringed two patents owned by Vringo, a federal jury in Norfolk, Virginia, decided yesterday. Vringo said it was awarded a 3.5 percent continuing royalty rate on the patents, which expire in 2016.
Vringo claimed Google’s Adsense program, which is also used as the advertising platform for third-party companies and AOL Search Marketplace, infringed the patents. The company had been seeking $493 million, before U.S. District Judge Raymond Jackson ruled that Vringo couldn’t collect any damages that might have occurred before the suit was filed in September 2011.
“We remain confident that the patents here are invalid, that we did not infringe them, and that we will ultimately win this case,” Google attorney Catherine Lacavera said in a statement.
Google was told to pay $15.9 million, AOL $7.9 million, and IAC Search & Media Inc. $6.6 million, according to the Virginian-Pilot newspaper. Target Corp. (TGT) was told to pay $98,800 and Gannett Co. $4,000, the Norfolk-based newspaper said. The companies all use Google’s program to display ads based on search results.
The court dispute is over filtering technology to determine placement of advertisements on search results. Vringo also claimed it was entitled to royalties going as far back as 2004, when Google first implemented its Smart Ads system.
Google, which reported revenue of $11.3 billion in the third quarter, denied infringing the patents and argued they were invalid.
The case is I/P Engine Inc. v. AOL Inc., 11-cv-512, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Norfolk).
VRINGO SUBSIDIARY I/P ENGINE FILES NOTICE OF APPEAL IN LITIGATION WITH AOL, GOOGLE ET AL.
Stories You Might Like
(Thomson Reuters ONE via COMTEX) -- Motions for Supplemental Damages and Ongoing Royalties Remain Pending in U.S. District Court
NEW YORK - April 4, 2013 - Vringo, Inc. (nyse mkt:VRNG), a company engaged in the innovation, development and monetization of mobile technologies and intellectual property, today announced that its wholly-owned subsidiary I/P Engine, Inc. has filed a notice of appeal in its litigation against AOL, Inc., Google, Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannett Company, Inc., and Target Corporation (collectively, "Defendants"). I/P Engine's notice of appeal applies to matters related to laches and the jury's calculation of past damages.
I/P Engine has engaged Joseph R. Re, Esq., a partner at the law firm Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP, as counsel for proceedings at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Attorneys from Dickstein Shapiro LLP, trial counsel to I/P Engine, remain engaged.
Background
On November 6, 2012, a jury in United States District Court in Norfolk, Virginia ruled in favor of I/P Engine and against Defendants with respect to Defendants' infringement of the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,314,420 and 6,775,664. After upholding the validity of the patents-in-suit, and determining that the asserted claims of the asserted patents were infringed by Defendants, the jury found that reasonable royalty damages should be based on a "running royalty," and that the running royalty rate should be 3.5%. I/P Engine presented evidence at trial that the appropriate way to determine the incremental royalty base attributable to Google's infringement was to calculate 20.9% of Google's U.S. AdWords revenue, then apply a 3.5% running royalty rate to that base. The jury also awarded I/P Engine a total of approximately $30.5 million as past damages. On November 20, 2012, the clerk entered judgment on the verdict. On April 3, 2013, the District Court resolved all of the pending motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial on damages. Certain matters remain pending before the District Court, as described below.
Notice of Appeal
I/P Engine has filed a Notice of Appeal, appealing to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit the final judgment entered by the District Court on April 3, 2013. I/P Engine is appealing the District Court's November 20, 2012 ruling that the doctrine of laches barred I/P Engine from recovering damages for any infringements by Defendants occurring before September 15, 2011, the date on which I/P Engine filed suit. I/P Engine is also appealing the District Court's April 3, 2013 ruling denying I/P Engine's Motion for a New Trial on the Dollar Amount of Past Damages.
Ongoing Activity in U.S. District Court
On November 9, 2012, I/P Engine filed a Motion for an Award of Pre-Judgment Interest, Post-Judgment Interest and Supplemental Damages. This motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for judicial determination.
On December 18, 2012, I/P Engine filed a Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties. On April 3, 2013, the District Court ordered Defendants to respond within fifteen (15) days. I/P Engine will then be permitted to file a reply to Defendants' response within seven (7) days, at which point, the motion will be ripe for judicial determination.
In this motion, I/P Engine has requested that the District Court order Defendants to pay ongoing running royalties for their continuing infringement of I/P Engine's patents from November 20, 2012, the date of the entry of judgment on the verdict, until either (i) Defendants cease their infringement or (ii) April 4, 2016, the expiration date of the patents.
I/P Engine argued that the Court should conclude that an upward adjustment to a 5% running royalty rate for Defendants' ongoing post-judgment infringement is appropriate. I/P Engine's damages expert, Dr. Stephen Becker, also reached the conclusion that there is no reason to depart downward from the 5% royalty rate because the patents are known to be valid and the patented technology is acknowledged to be "mission critical" for Google.
Further, I/P Engine argued that Defendants' ongoing infringement is undisputedly willful because Defendants are fully aware that their use of AdWords has been adjudged to infringe all of the asserted claims of the valid and enforceable patents-in-suit. Therefore, I/P Engine requested that the District Court enhance the ongoing royalty rate to 7% in light of Defendants' ongoing willful infringement.
Finally, I/P Engine requested that the District Court order that, among other things, Defendants pay ongoing royalties to I/P Engine on a quarterly basis in certified funds or by wire transfer, accompanied by a statement certifying, under penalty of perjury, the U.S. revenue attributable to Defendants' use of AdWords and the calculation of the royalty amount.
A copy of I/P Engine's motion is available online at http://bit.ly/UPYkFh.
Additional Information
The case is styled I/P Engine, Inc. vs. AOL Inc. et al., and is pending in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division. The case number is 2:11cv512RAJ. The court docket for the case is publicly available on the Public Access to Court Electronic Records website, www.pacer.gov, which is operated by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
No problem. I think this appeal is strategic for the upcoming settlement talks with Google. They want to make sure Google understands not to bother coming to the table with any low ball offers. Just my opinion
JJ You can appeal the matter before final judgement.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/rules-of-practice/rules.html
Rule 4. Appeal as of Right — When Taken
(a) Appeal in a Civil Case.
(1) Time for Filing a Notice of Appeal.
(A) In a civil case, except as provided in Rules
4(a)(1)(B), 4(a)(4), and 4(c), the notice of
appeal required by Rule 3 must be filed with the
district clerk within 30 days after the judgment
or order appealed from is entered.
(B) When the United States or its officer or agency
is a party, the notice of appeal may be filed by
any party within 60 days after the judgment or
order appealed from is entered.
(C) An appeal from an order granting or denying
an application for a writ of error coram nobis
is an appeal in a civil case for purposes of Rule
4(a).
(2) Filing Before Entry of Judgment. A notice of appeal
filed after the court announces a decision or order
— but before the entry of the judgment or order
— is treated as filed on the date of and after the
entry.
(3) Multiple Appeals. If one party timely files a notice
of appeal, any other party may file a notice of appeal
within 14 days after the date when the first notice
was filed, or within the time otherwise prescribed
by this Rule 4(a), whichever period ends later.
Yes you are right I was watching that this morning that person was keen on buying early probably because they knew what the Pacers were
The short position is dead no matter what they say. The conditions necessary for shorting now don't exist, no real time delays, jmol denied, MSFT settlement also works against them, creates an air of uncertainty as far as timing and what can happen.
Their position is trapped only because they will behave the same way longs do in not taking profits when they have them and being overly greedy.
One of the talking points the shorts will use is something you mentioned:
The only thing I can think of is a) they are stuck in their positions and/or b) they hope HJJ says the Vringo portion is 2.09%. I can't imaging HJJ sticking with the jury (error) because there is no evidence presented at trial to base that number.
Wow that is interesting but it is also human nature, laziness that is....
FYI Dan Ravicher expects a RR of 4-5% in a tweet today FWIW.....
no delays possible dates set in stone....