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.
IMO, tomorrow is IDCC's most important CC in their history. If we hear the same old rhetoric and continue to take a passive stance against infringers then I will seriously consider getting out of this stock after 6 frustrating years. I was very happy when WM became the CEO. Bill, this is your moment to show what you are made of. I hope you take the gloves off and take and start kicking butt. No more Mr nice guy. If you do, then I'll go all the way with you!
In para 24 it states that the majority concluded that Sony-Ericsson is a Major Competitor under the Master Agreement.
In para 25 it states that Sony-Ericsson is not one of the 3 Major Competitors specifically identified in the Master Agreement and that the Award also correctly states that
Sony-Ericsson is not, under New York law, a successor or assign of Ericsson.
In para 26 it states that the Award nevertheless concludes that Sony-Ericsson qualifies as a Major Competitor sufficient to trigger certain Nokia royalty obligations under the PLA.
In para 27 it concludes that the majority rewrote the contract, exceeded its authority, manifestly disregarded the settled law and reached a totally irrational result.
I am not a lawyer but IMO this seems to be legal jibberish! Any comments?
"impermissibly punished Nokia for exercising its right to arbitration"
Exercising its right to arbitration what? This was an arbitration. I'm confused as to what this means unless this relates to a 3G arbitration.
Just because Nok says they will file does not mean they absolutely will, ie: they could be bluffing.
There are many logical reasons (already mentioned on this board) for Nok to not file and settle this issue: prepayment discount, interest, ill will created towards ICC, possible damages or penalties, negative image if they lose to upstart IDCC, etc, but the main reason is the distraction that is IMO causing them to lose ground in 3G to their competitors.
That said, even though my brain says they will not file, my gut says they will.
For those hoping Nokia will file, don't be too disappointed when you find out they did not file.
DD, my only point here is that it could go either way and IMO the best strategy is to just wait and see. IMO, logic says Nok will not file but my gut says they probably will, though I'm not betting either way.
Won't IDCC issue an 8K when they receive the filing which I assume would be before it gets on Pacer?
"Right now all companies that need to pay IDCC and haven't are ALL waiting for NOK to fight it out with IDCC in the courts"
Why is Nok picking up the tab for these other companies? Unless of course they are in cahoots and have an agreement to share the costs?
"well it would seem more are favoring a no file than file"
Logic says Nok should not file but my gut says they will. Let's hope they come to their senses by Monday!
"As to the second part of your question, NOK can appeal the decision of the district court of New York. To accurately state a time period for all proceedings and appeals is impossible, but you are looking a probably a year and a half at a minimum, excluding possible appeal to the supreme court or a remand to the district court for rehearing. This could add several more years."
Ghors, there has been some discussion that the supreme court would not accept such an appeal. What about the circuit court? Can they also not accept such an appeal and on what grounds can they do so?
Thanks.
"IMO I don't think this is a good time to be sitting on the sidelines looking for an opportunity to buy back in and I also don't think it makes sense to wait this long for results and consider selling."
Very good advice Jim. We need to be careful here as the shorts can be trying to manipulate this again. Plus the fact that IDCC has brought in 4 more lawyers does not suggest a settlement! IMO
There will be a lot of unhappy campers around here if WM does not deliver at least one of the 20-25 potential licensees that we are in economic talks with by the Aug 4 CC. C'mon Bill show us the new and improved IDCC!
"If they file a frivolous action in attempting to upset the award, punitive damages could be assessed."
That is the part that I'm most interested in. What
are the punitive damages that could be assessed?
L2V,
"I'm hoping that the ICC sealed all of those escapes and that the Court hearing IDCC's Motion to Enforce will not allow Nokia to pry any of them open at this point no matter WHAT they scream."
I believe the above to be true, but I also believe there seems to be no way to stop Nok from appealing that decision to the circuit court with again more delays. Does anyone know if the circuit court can deny an appeal, eg: on frivolous grounds?
I am a long who will go the distance with IDCC, but I fear that Nok will also go all the way because there is no incentive for them not to try. I hope our little IDCC has something up their sleeves that they will soon unleash!
There has been some discussion that Nok's claim that the award is not enforceable has to do with E/SE also being a 3G trigger. Nok has already filed that the arb has nothing to do with 3G. One question I have is don't they have a valid argument if the arb was only about 2G? Then again the ICC has some very smart people working for them and I would think they would not make the 3G connection without a valid reason(s)! So what could those reasons be? Is it possible that there was something in the 2G contract that also connected 3G?
DD, very surprised by your statements! Never thought that such a staunch believer in IDCC would succomb to Nok's FUD. All the recent negativity of this board and the hope that we get bought out soon is playing into Nok's hands. What a shame it has come to this!
"Have any of IDCC's patents suffered the same fate as GBT and if so, how material is it to IDCC's patent base? Do we still have essential technology in all standards as the company stated years ago or has the cabal done an end run around us like they appeared to have done with GBT? It is something very worrisome to me."
DD, my only reply would be why did other companies, especially the Japanese, sign up for 3G if IDCC did not have IPR essential to 3G? Can this cabal force the other companies who have already signed up to change to the new "end run" standard? I would hope not!
"the fact that Nok can delay payment for at least 2 years (and perhaps longer) after E/SE begins paying"
Another 2+ years to determine if E/SE is a trigger? Wouldn't the 3G contract have the same language as the 2G contract and end up with the same result, only MUCH SOONER?
Could someone please explain how the rates would be significantly affected by the UK case even if Nok wins, ie: this is just for the UK and not worldwide?
Loop, FANTASTIC post!
Those are also my feelings but I could never have said it like you did. Thank you very much!
"professional courtesy extended by IDCC"!
What advantage would that give IDCC? Why do we always have to play nice guy?
When you aren't bashing management you make some solid contributions to this board!
Jimmy,
Let me be more specific. What is the difference between the DAQAD and WKQAD for strike price of $20 for the January 21, 2006 Calls?
eg: see link below:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/options/default.asp?Symbol=IDCC&Month=1&Year=2006
An options question: when I look at the January 21, 2006 Calls, I see 2 entries each for the same strike price. Could someone explain that? Thanks.
From Carpenter's report: "We are maintaining our $26 price target. Our 2005 estimates, and thus our price target, reflect a favorable resolution to IDCC’s arbitration with Nokia and Samsung. The $26 price target is based on a 25x multiple of our 2005 EPS estimate of $0.93, which yields $24, then, we add IDCC’s $2 per share in cash."
I don't understand the "$2 per share in cash". What about the increase in cash from Nok and Sam award for 2002-2004?
Your post is a keeper! Many Thanks Ghors.
I truly believe that this all comes down to 3G!
Nok knows if they accept this arb decision that they will be triggered for 3G thru Ericy and IMO they will do anything to delay this.
Nok might think that since they only have to pay for half of what IDCC expected (and what Nok reserved for) that, so what if we spend some of the money saved, on legal expenses to challenge the arb decision.
I strongly agree with you that there has to be a BIG penalty to deter this kind of behavior. This past week I have not heard anything that is a strong incentive for Nok to just accept the arb decision and pay up.
I have an account already set up but could not buy Calls. I called Fidelity customer service and they told me I was only set up for Level 1, and would need Level 2 to buy Calls which I would not be approved for. I've given up with Fidelity and will probably get an account with optionsXpress.
Thanks for your help.
I'm interested in buying a Call but Fidelity will not let me because I need to be at Level 2. Any recommendations for online option trading sites that will allow me to do this? Thanks.
Please respond privately so as to not clutter up this board.
Don't feel so bad cuz you've got some company. I was in doubt yesterday morning in the pre-market, so what did I do: Act Stupid!
"Merritt made this comment this morning. I guess this supports the analysis by some over here that Ericy might be waiting for an arbitration decision to sign a 3G license."
If that's true then I would like to know what "an arbitration decision" really means, ie: does Nok have to ACCEPT the arbitration decision before Ericy signs?
It's not what you say it's HOW you say it that rubs people the wrong way! I actually believe that you have made some contributions to this board in the past. Just tone it down please.
I read it as Steven Jeffrey.
Did I see Goldberg as one of the inventors? Is that our Howard?
That may be a good reason for Nok's actions! I do believe they are linked.
I did the same......oh well!
"One of the three arbitrators"...I bet it was the arbitrator chosen by NOK.
First, 3G prospects look much better now and second, IDCC should get almost a buck per share just from Nok and Sam just for 2G.
His valuation at $18.40 to $19.40 per share and NEUTRAL! Gimme a break!
Bill, I strongly agree!
Are those numbers correct?
Can you provide a link?
Thanks.