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.
Good One, Habu LOL
Badgerkid: I'm getting married on June 24th. I own two crockpots and have not even looked out on the BBBynd registry to see what all my fiance' decided she wants. I'm getting everything I asked for at the wedding so I don't think I'm even going to look.
Spencer: I'm speculating, and that genius Olddog can quickly clear this up, but I believe the company bylaws set a limit to the overall outstanding shares - say 100 million. And to increase that number by making a change to the bylaws would take a shareholder vote (which could only be nixed in a vote due to painful memory of managements historical propensity to line their pockets w/shares at the dilution of all shareholder,s interests (i.e. stock compensation program), creating predictible fluries of form 4 insider stock sale disclosures anytime the stock increases (today does not qualify - a non-event)).
However, if a share repurchase program would allow us to get under the threshold to multiply the existing outstanding shares by 2 while still staying within the overall authorized shares allowed in the by-laws, then a 2 for 1 split could be announced, pending shareholder approval, without the need to have the overall number of authorized shares increased in our bylaws(a dilutionary event also subject to shareholder vote, but perhaps w/less chance of approval at this time).
Does any of that make sense? I, for one, hope they are positioning for a stock split.
You are forgetting that Nokia is the only company that funded our TDMA development, and only Samsung claimed to be tied to the same boat, and the tow rope was cut today.
Tomorrow is a new day, and tomorrow Nokia can be sued for infringement of our 3G patents.
No other company is an apples to apples comparison to what occured today regarding 3G. And I'm still not clear on whether they have forgiven royalties, or whether they have simply agreed not to litigate for infringement before this date.
Who knows - maybe before the market opens tommorrow a 3G license agreement will be made and announced so that IDCC does not file an infringement lawsuit against them.
I was somewhat impressed with the timeline with which we will receive our money - Right Now. That at least provides on thing noone can dish IDCC for over.
Say, has anyone checked w/the pizza delivery man yet?
Am I counting on this to happen - no
Am I hoping it will happen just this way - yes
If it happens, should the stock trading be stopped. Yes, solely in order for us all to count our money, and roll around in it...
I'm really glad they did not come out with a release stating that "we believe based on this settlement that Samsung is obligated to pay x amount..."
Speak softly and carry a big hockey stick
Samsung is probably evaluating what hit them at this very moment. Moral of the story: By riding the coat tails of Nokia, one will get esPOO all over you...
My brother called me w/the news about a half hour ago. Read the release and then Loopholes highly respected comments, then jumped for joy!!!
Congrats to all.
Hope the rest of the 3G negotiations proceed in good faith, and I bet we see some other companies start signing on the line throughout 2006.
Re: Toxic = Top six - Well I'm feeling pretty imaginative now - thanks for the correction! See how that Mot debacle still weighs - A license with them would sure be a welcome
sign of success.
MOT sure would, I thought that was behind UB's use of the word toxic to describe potential upcoming agreements at the last conference call - purely my speculation.
OT: RE Nicmar
I'll try doing this much over the weekend while home. I have so many branches starting low I was afraid there wouldn't too much tree left, but I'll take another look and take some out.
A great common sense idea on the inward growing ones.
I'll let you know how it goes.
OT: Nicmar,
We had a pretty good ice and snow mix that stripped alot of my cedar trees of their limbs a few weeks back, but the two apple trees are still needing a trim this year. If you would consider a Saturday afternoon drive from God's country to Silex, MO and show me what to cut, I'll do the all the work, then me and my fiance will cook you and your loved one up a real fine BBQ dinner for your troubles.
Let me know if it's a possibility sometime soon?
Sorry all, not a member and can't do private messaging
I'll have to check back this eve.
I'll be happy to see the breach of contract lawsuit filed, and if so, could be not collect treble damages in such a lawsuit?
Conference call was very impressively orchestrated by all. In the past I have made a couple off-hand remarks questioning Fagan's abilities and I will say that I felt he was well prepared, polished, and executed extremely well, based upon reading the transcript. UB also was very confident yet not arrogant at all.
I am soooo glad to hear UB speak so much about shareholder value, and at this stage of hitting our market I am completely happy with a stock repurchase, as there are still some uncertainties ahead - why place yourself in the expectation of providing an ongoing annuity (implied from the day you declare one that it should henceforth be a perpetual stream.
Wait until you KNOW you can support that. The shareholder buyback is an event that can still be controlled based upon performance that is still forward-looking. It's the right move for our current position - as it is an anti-dilutive gesture that, taken with his shareholder value message, I really appreciate.
I like that we're moving from a toll station to a technology enabler, with tangible value adds, products, and chips, to help drive a licensing program for the underlying IPR that we developed and gained acceptance for, in full witness and competition among peers in the standards bodies.
It was the best I have heard and I feel more confidence in both the CEO and the CFO. Great Job!
Terps,
All I can say is congratulations and that I wish I had your problems. I know many exited Morgan Stanley a year or so back - I have no idea how their recovery is shaping up?
re: Bulldozer,
I sure was over the top on that bloodsucking greed statement and any attack on individuals could only be based on perception rather than any hard facts I have put together. My apologies to all for that - all of which comes out of frustration over what I consider to be the only downside and the highest risk to the most promising investment that I hold.
I'm not selling my shares any time soon but I applaud any individuals that "do the math" and attempt to correct abuse. Seeing what's in the numbers is a talent too - the board does not consist of only lawyers adding value.
CORP stood up professionaly for what he believes in through an available avenue with the intent of making a difference, and forcing an improvement, to curb the direct transfer of wealth occuring from shareholder to management via accountability and less entrenched tenures. I personally felt it was a bold move for an individual to make, and if there was no malicious intent it becomes an example of the true leadership.
Shareholder's could be and should be realizing a higher return on investment, and public companies are not supposed to be run with shareholder's as the bottom of the list of priorities - not taking anything away from employees - and I'm not implicating the employees/engineers as the ones abusing the shareholder's in my venting.
Sorry for the overkill, and thanks for allowing me to vent a little. I'm back to lurking. It's the bashing of an example where someone put the math directly in front of all to make a valid point that made me step up.
I do like the focus of the board and the coverage of legal developments. I also feel LG license was true validation and more will follow - the lawyer's contributions are awesome, as always.
One of Warren Buffets main criteria for selecting a company to invest in is to have a responsible management taking actions that are non-dilutive to shareholders. It's the managements bloodsucking greed that has had people waiting for years, and some dying before ever seeing a return on their investment.
IDCC recently came to the feeding trough again, and threw out the surprise 15 million to pacify the circumstances surrounding their slothful actions, while they could have surprised the market by beating the expected numbers - yet instead they fed themselves again.
I have to side with CORP on his point and I could care less about the timing - it's the stinking truth and everyone defends their actions while the Holy Grail is always in the distance for the shareholder's but a perpetual fountain for management - if the company was run with Shareholder Interests in mind we would all be much wealthier by now.
I know - I have to shut-up because HC was re-elected, but I think his position and the compensation levels he has been responsible for is a total conflict of interest with Shareholders. We've all been through these conversations ad-nauseum - and I think the consensus was that CORP Buyer has every right to make a good point, just not over and over again.
There are many long-term shareholder,s that feel management is greedy and don't give a rats about shareholder's. HG stated it publicly that shareholder's fall below both management and other employees in the hierarchy - essentially at the bottom and it's obvious to some the company is essentially still run like a private company, owned by Harry Campagna - an independent director by title.
I, for one, would appreciate a temporary tumble so that I can hop back on some leaps without getting skinned alive on premiums.
Ya know, I made a couple of negative comments about Fagan a week or so back (sort of kidding, but a jab nevertheless), and after reading his credentials, and a similar onslaught the other day, I was quite impressed w/the guys background that someone posted on the board and regret making any negative remarks at all about the guy. I wish him all the success.
Desert Dweller:
Fagan is not going to know exactly when to book it unti Ronny provides him further accounting guidance. Of course, they don't invite Ronny to the trough to feed...what an injustice
Ricardo, Nokia's action already resulted in my boycott of there phones, and I even filled out a customer survey upon their new product notification why I would not purchase their products. I'm sure I'm not the only IDCC Shareholder, or Qualcom shareholder that has done so.
Data, Yang has arrived on the board!!!
Gotta love the balance in the Universe...
Mschere: Now that's a good omen!
Thanks for the post!
Robert, sure it's legal they'll just be listening to everything you say. LOL
I feel your pain JaeJae. I was really loaded up expecting a positive outcome of Nokia arbitration. It took most of my play money. I had enough on the line to buy a new truck and an nice engagement ring. I lost the truck, and get married June 24th.
I know - some would have bought the truck...
jaejae,
I certainly have been in your shoes in months past. And I'm down heartily this year because of it. Ya got to move past it cause there was no foul.
Jimlur,
Thanks for all you do! This rides going to take off, someday soon. If the market laughs at this one it's only to load the boat.
Look what recently happened to RMBS, when the outlook started looking positive, even before the hand is played out. A very recent double just on a more promising outlook, and a license agreement.
Hope the recognition now comes around to us.
Navakov - Great Post! The best
Was reviewing the board and market when 8-K hit. Been joyously reading the board ever since. Somebody needs to call and wake Nicmar up - I'm surprised the lucky guy wasn't out buying options today. Holding no options myself, but I bought more Roth shares about four weeks ago when things were looking flat and at least feel good about that.
Congrats to all the longs!
OT: Art,
Yep, still a road warrior supporing a software implementation for the Navy. I really enjoy it alot (except the travel gets old). Just booked ticks to D.C. to evaluate what the next rollout has to offer for our command, and I will hopefully support that rollout as well.
Recently became engaged to my high school sweetie in November. I realized what I missed out on the first time, and didn't make the same mistake twice. A wonderful eight year old girl will make a family of three. I just turned forty three and it's nice to finally find someone to share the joys of life with. God willing, little Cassi sure wants a brother or sister to play with.
I'll have to talk Nicmar out to the farm for BBQ this spring so he can supervise while I trim my two apple trees.
My3Sons - ever tried the Country Quencher?
Great news today
Nicmar, glad to hear it man. Nice timing...
sinnett4, you can only say that in hindsight.
revlis, I would not bet against you on that one. Just making a point that there were really only two litigation matters that would prevent forward momentum and one's down even without further progress w/Lucent over the IDCC patent portfolio.
Revlis,
There may really be some meat behind this settlement that will become apparent later - obviously everyone is wanting clarity, analysts especially. How is an analyst supposed to jump on board if we are not going to explain the full scope of a legal settlement?
But on a morepositive note, If there are any obvious outstanding issues that may be holding up a 3G deal with someone like ERICY - anticipated from HG remarks of their integrity, the valuation of Tantivity patents could have been a source of delay, and with valuation now established it's one less potential obstacle to a 3G agreement w/ERICY.
I always believed that IDCC agreed to step up to the litigation table defending Tantivity's original patents as part of the original agreement with Tantivity, and that final settlements with those parties on the valuation of that deal rest on this outcome. Hence it always had to be an arms-length away, and the two portfolio's will be valuated separately.
It wasn't until later that IDCC made a full acquisition and it then became even fuzzier on how much the total payout for the Tantivity patents actually are, or if valuation still rests on the outcome of this case.
I think a subsequent Lucent agreement will be structured similar to ERICYs, with the possible exception that it may be an actual cross-licensing agreement versus an option to excercise a Technology Reference Platform agreement (sorry I don't recall the term exactly). The possibility of a cross-license agreement also raises the possibility of a lower dollar amount if Lucent has patents that IDCC feels would be valuable to them.
Sjratty, there is some wisdom in this approach and IDCC has always offered to license patents individually, even though they push for convenience licenses. I think actions like these keep them on the right side of the fence regarding Patent Misuse. The following link brought to the board by DataRox in post 127739 asserts that one cannot force a company to license a bundle of patents that are not essential along with essential patents:
http://fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1361.pdf
If the link doesn't work see the original post by DataRox...
Regards
Re: Jimlur
I thought Samsumg's remaining arbitration was them arguing that they are 3G licensee by virtue of MFL clause. Isn't this the issue that is still in dispute?
Tks for your insight!
Re: DogCharlie,
No, I have not spoken with MickeyBritt, and was just reminiscing a little. I enjoyed his personality on the board.
If someone dropped a needle in this chatroom we could hear it.
I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Lard Azz Nokia Attorney's monitoring this board have died of boredom.
Somethings big must be on the horizon. Mickey says "This stock is a screaming buy!!!"
Good post Data Rox! Very intuitive, even good advice - perhaps UB reads this board as well...
MSchere,
I noticed that IDCC used the same verbiage after the Markman hearing w/Tantivity as they did after the Markman Hearing w/ERICY - that the results did not materially affect the amount sought.
However, with ERICY it was disclosed what amount they were seeking, and they received much much less than that upon settlement.
With Tantivity the amount sought is not known (to my knowledge), but I feel now that statement is boilerplate posturing and therefore you should not read too much into the statement.
Nicmar,
Not everyone that hit the sidelines or became quiet is necessarily walking away from their invesment. It's just that well, near term calls do not seem to be a good play and there is no reason not to step back and enjoy the summer while it's still left. Market always seems to heat up as summer vacation ends and higher volume drives the market.
Take a little breather if ya like, but don't get lost too long. Ya better try swimming - it's awful hot these days.