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.
Anything is possible but I was not happy that they let Sammy wiggle for another 45 days plus another month on top of that if the unthinkable happens. IMO this should have been able to be settled much quicker than that with all the time they have taken so far trying to resolve this. Remember we went to our first arbitration with Sammy back in 2000 or 2001. Just frustrated that the stock isn't trading much higher on news we are on the verge of a settlement.
Message In Reply To:
D dwellwer, it is possible they needed th 45 days to present the settlement conditions to and obtain approval of their respective boards.
Loop what is your opinion of the 45 days and in addition the extension to Feb 9, 2009 for Luckern to issue his findings if the unthinkable happens? Why after 10 years of fighting and negotiations, would they need an additional 45 days to finalize this? I for one am very disappointed that they granted Sammy the additional month and a half plus the additional month on top of that before Luckern issues his report. This should have been able to be completed in a week, two tops IMO.
In my dealings with attorneys (which is very limited) they must have gone to the same class as accountants do that doesn't appear on a persons transcript. The focus of that class is "don't put off till tomorrow what you can postpone until the day after". No matter what the amount of time for a deadline, accountants and attorneys will take all the time granted to them to complete a project. If they would have said we will agree to a week stay, then both parties would have done all that is necessary to get the job done in a week. Giving them as much time as they have just delays things unnecessarily IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Mickey
I think all IDCCers are on the same page. They just want the street to react quicker. Many have Dec options and they obviously want the share price to rise post haste. This deal is going to happen, but guidance cannot occur until it closes. With various hedges via options and puts, someone is always going to be unhappy with any waiting period that goes past their options date. Some blame the company even though the company is doing the best it can. IDCC has kept Samsung's feet to the fire as much as the enforcement systems would allow. If for some reason Samsung pays and signs earlier during the 45 day period, but after December options friday, we will hear the squealing despite the watershed effect it will have over the rest of the sector holdouts.
MO
loop
micky there is a difference between an already announced buyback and announcing one before the details emerge from the binding term sheet. Insider trading rules apply to companies as well as individuals. The way around it is using a pre-planned trading 105-b(?) plan but since we don't have a buy back in place right now, I don't believe they could enter the market until after the details emerge regarding Sammy. I could be wrong but I doubt it.
We haven't sold a single chip and you think the business will sell for 100 million? LOL.
Message In Reply To:
Good analysis and you are being conservative. One thing that you might want to incorporate in your figures for comparison is the product development expense money IDCC spent in 2007. I think those numbers were as significant as the legal fees from what I recall. Also selling the chip unit for $100 million. No matter which way you slice it, within one year we should be at $100+.
Except they can't buy back today since they are in possession of material news and it would be insider trading. They are the only ones who are privy to the terms sheet and if they buy back now, it would be trading on non public info IMO. After the news hits, I doubt if we will be trading at $25 and then that $100 million wouldn't be buying back 10% of the outstanding shares.
As far as the average dividend yield, how many of those companies who are currently paying 4% and higher are in jeopardy of cutting back or eliminating those juicy yields? IDCC if it were to start a dividend of a buck a share would be able to pay that and increase it substantially going forward IMO. You are correct, they need to evaluate all options but considering so far they have paid more on average to buyback the stock in treasury than the current stock price over the past 5 years, management hasn't been patient enough with shareholder money IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Or IDCC can take $100 million dollars and buyback 4 million shares at $25 which would increase eps by about 10% and that would be a permanent increase of about 10%.
mo
Isn't it amazing that the street still doesn't believe these numbers? Your analysis is simple and to the point. Considering we are recognizing $57 million/year from LG, the conservative numbers you posted should be easily doable with the market share Sammy and Nokia have compared with LG. Why isn't the street seeing this yet? I guess they feel like Charlie Brown and Lucy due to the many years of Lucy pulling the ball away too many times to go out on a limb and project the numbers you are. They are acting as if they are all from Missouri and need to be shown before going out on a limb. I know a little part of me feels the same way but only a little.
The signing of Sammy at this point in this market has taken away the downside risk IMO at these levels. Had the stock jumped to $40, I believe there could be some risk but in the mid 20's, there isn't any IMO. The only way the stock is worth only $25 today is if somehow management totally gave away the farm to induce Sammy to sign and I don't believe they did that. I doubt if they are going to get anywhere near $2 bucks a phone from them like some here believe but even at $.75-1.00 (which is my estimate fwiw) the numbers are huge and the impact to EPS is great as you pointed out.
Message In Reply To:
I have been doing a little math to past the time. IDCC's income in 2007 was 234M. Operations aprox 211M. Let's say Nok will be done soon and litigation cost goes away. Litigation cost for 07 was aprox 24M. Subtract that from Operating and you have 187M. 234M-187M = 47M. Here is where the fun begins. Add in a conservative 100M for Sam and 200M for Nok you get 47M + 100M + 200M= 347M *.35 for taxes= 121.45. 347M - 121.45= 225.55M/44M= 5.12 eps. A multiple of 10= $50, 15=$75, 20=$100. Now you throw in Mot & Eric for another 1 eps the pps goes to $60, $80, $120. I tink my estimates are very consevative as I truly believe eps after taxes will be closer to $8 eps based on WCDMA and CDMA units sold in 2009 and closer to $14 eps by 2012.
Or unless the stock finally gets valued at what we think it should be. If the stock finally gets a decent valuation, hopefully they use the extra cash to begin issuing dividends instead of buying back stock. As the stock rises, the number of shares that will be able to be taken off the market goes down. With a $500 million settlement from Sammy and only 43 million shares outstanding, they could begin dividend payments of a buck a share and increase it from there without hurting our cash position. Count a settlement with those thieving Finish b@stards and the dividend could easily double or more in a year and still maintain a very healthy cash balance.
Let's hope the cash doesn't burn a hole in management's pocket and they feel the need to do something immediately. The markets will be under pressure for a while and they should be prudent with the cash for future acquisitions or stock buybacks. Dividend payments can be a relatively cheap way to return the money to shareholders and increase the universe of mutual funds that would be interested in taking up big positions in IDCC since the dividend payments would be virtually guaranteed into the future. How many companies today can be assured of paying dividends in the near future with the financial uncertainty we are experiencing?
Message In Reply To:
jai,
It is a good bet that come Jan. when the check hits the bank a new share repurchase plan will be implemented.
Unless there is a solid acquisition.
mo
The other thing we don't know is when did the 45 days start? They could have had the term sheet signed the prior week (which wouldn't be the first time the held off news on an options expiration week) and that is why the press release said approximately 45 days IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Olddog: In most legal systems, anything over 5 - 10 days includes weekends and holidays. Anything less than 5 days, will be business days.
IMO, this is going to be 45 days from Monday.
G hors
I long for the good ole days when the Dow futures showed gains and losses in the single and double digits. This volatility is making and losing some serious money for traders while everyone else gets whipsawed. Have a Happy and Safe Thanksgiving all.
That was from the Wall Street Journal and I posted it here yesterday.
Posted by: Desert dweller Date: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:56:26 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 238925 [Send a link via email]
From the WSJ, it mentions Apple, Rimm and the ongoing dispute with Nokia who declined to comment lol. They are now realizing they are no longer in the drivers seat, hopefully they jump over to the passenger seat and sign on along with Sammy.
InterDigital Settles Suits With Samsung
By SARA SILVER
InterDigital Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. settled a pair of long-running patent-infringement lawsuits Monday, on the eve of a U.S. International Trade Commission decision on whether to recommend banning imports of Samsung's high-speed cellphones.
InterDigital has received $1.5 billion from its wireless patents, mostly from licensing fees and royalties. It has issued licenses covering technology in Apple Inc.'s iPhone and Research in Motion Ltd.'s BlackBerry devices.
But the company has struggled to sign up players such as Samsung, the world's second-biggest cellphone maker by sales, and Nokia Corp., the biggest, which it has also sued.
The case before the ITC covered a high-speed broadband technology called 3G used in Samsung's Blackjack II and Instinct handsets. Analysts believe that so-called smartphones will be the most resilient part of the global cellphone market, which is expected to contract next year.
"If Samsung wants to remain competitive where the cellphone industry is growing, it needs to use InterDigital's intellectual property," said Chris Colarik, portfolio manager at Glenmede Trust, a Philadelphia investment-management firm that holds shares in InterDigital. "At the 11th hour, it appears that they are not willing to risk losing the ability to sell their advanced cellphones in the U.S."
Engineers who went on to found Qualcomm Inc. developed InterDigital's patents in the 1980s, when InterDigital set out to offer wireless telephony in rural areas. InterDigital never became a major player in telecom equipment but holds an array of patents for wireless technologies, and now makes semiconductors.
According to a statement issued late Monday, the Samsung settlement, which runs through 2012, also covers an earlier technology known as 2G, for which Samsung last year posted a $167 million bond. The companies didn't release the value of the settlement, which requires Samsung to choose one of two payment options within the next 45 days. Both companies have agreed to drop all litigation and arbitration once InterDigital receives its first payment.
Tom Carpenter, a telecom analyst at Hilliard Lyons who owns shares in InterDigital, estimates the value of Samsung's settlement at $400 million to $500 million over the next five years. Samsung sold 87 million 3G phones from 2004 through June 2008, while Nokia sold 142 million, according to IDC's Mobile Phone Tracker. The research firm projects that 3G phone sales will increase from 314 million this year to 721 million in 2012.
InterDigital last year filed a similar infringement case against Nokia, which is the largest maker of 3G phones. A judge is set to hear evidence in May 2009 and rule in August, with the full ITC ruling due by mid-December. InterDigital won a $253 million payment from Nokia in 2006.
Nokia declined to comment.
InterDigital shares were up 13% at $29 in after-hours trading, after jumping 24% to $25.68 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
Write to Sara Silver at sara.silver@wsj.com
If anyone would have told me yesterday we would trade today in the $24's I would have thought they lost their mind, although with IDCC I guess I/we shouldn't be surprised. The lack of information in the release last night is keeping a lid on the stock price, I just didn't think someone would be jumping up and down on the lid to squish it down.
With the fact that this HAS TO BE the single largest agreement ever entered into in IDCC's history, the total lack of information is surprising. It has to be worth at least $500 million considering that Sammy owed us nearly $200 million for 2g alone that we were on the verge of collecting most of. Management couldn't have signed for less than a half billion IMO. I would have thought due to materiality, it would need to be disclosed at least in broad strokes but what do I know? Good luck to all and hopefully in 45 days there is more clarity and we are then on our way. Have a Happy Thanksgiving all.
I can't wait until the day we no longer have these "wonderful" buying opportunities until the street wakes up. I for one even in my most pessimistic predictions didn't think we would be trading under $28 now.
Personally I can't see why there would be any ask's in the low 30's today. There is no way after yesterday that I would be selling that low. To me all the downside risk is out of the stock at these levels for the foreseeable future. That being said, the market is as weird as it has ever been in my lifetime and with the way IDCC never seems to get to the levels we know it should, to me means there will be many sellers in the high 20's and low 30's because they don't understand the company. Right now we still don't know what the deal is worth and after 1.5 years, we still don't even know what Apple is worth. While I am a firm believer in IDCC, the street does not share our enthusiasm and it will take more deals for that to happen. I believe the deals will come and soon.
Message In Reply To:
I'm curious....rather than market predictions what price per share would cause people to buy today? For those predicting a price in the 40's today, will you be buying at 30?
How about selling? Anybody planning on selling in the 30's today?
Personally, I might buy some in the mid to high-20's area, but not much above that....just so many details that are unknown right now.
Slacker
IDCC just went across the CNBC ticker at $29.90, not as high as some would like but significantly higher than it could have had yesterday's agreement not happened. It's all good. Have a Happy Thanksgiving all.
dmiller, I tend to agree with you on your prediction although I hope you are seriously underestimating the price. Had this agreement happened last October when the Dow was climbing to its record high, it would have hit $40-50. In this market, considering there were trades yesterday in after hours under $30 even though the volume was low, I don't expect the pps to get anywhere near where IT SHOULD TODAY. Ultimately it will, but it won't happen quickly IMO.
I hope you and I are totally wrong and I would love nothing better than for the stock to be trading in the mid 30's or higher today. Hopefully management gets some licensing momentum this time around and turns this one deal into 3-4 more even with smaller players. That would send a huge signal to street as to where we are and where we are heading. Congrats to all longs and hopefully we get some more great news soon.
Message In Reply To:
I think we will open around $28.00 but we will not close anywhere near $38.99
Why $38.00? Is there anything behind that number? Why not just say $50? I've seen some crazy numbers posted here lately like $100 by Christmas.
I think we'll close around or just below $30 and these numbers can be on the high side. As usual I hope I'm wrong. The market will have a lot to do with the above.
Is it too much to ask for on such a momentous day that IDCC follows this up with another home run such as a license deal with Ericy or even Nokia soon? I can dream can't I? That would put us over the top as far as the analysts go and there would then be a buying frenzy. Let's hope they have their pen out to sign another deal soon.
Merrit in the past talked about momentum, let's hope this time it turns into reality. Way to go IDCC management, keep up the pressure on the rest. With the number 2 thief out of the way, the others should come soon IMO. It just makes me sick the way Batts stopped us dead in our tracks back in March otherwise we would be celebrating 2 agreements tonight. Oh well it will come soon enough. Congrats to all!!!
Message In Reply To:
I've long hoped that an ERIC/SNE announcement would follow either Sammy or Nokia. Just couldn't believe they settled 2G without a 3G agreement. I guess we'll find out soon!
Nice to sit hear celebrating with a Midletons Irish whiskey and re-thinking my decision to not pay the PSL for the Jets
From the WSJ, it mentions Apple, Rimm and the ongoing dispute with Nokia who declined to comment lol. They are now realizing they are no longer in the drivers seat, hopefully they jump over to the passenger seat and sign on along with Sammy.
InterDigital Settles Suits With Samsung
By SARA SILVER
InterDigital Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. settled a pair of long-running patent-infringement lawsuits Monday, on the eve of a U.S. International Trade Commission decision on whether to recommend banning imports of Samsung's high-speed cellphones.
InterDigital has received $1.5 billion from its wireless patents, mostly from licensing fees and royalties. It has issued licenses covering technology in Apple Inc.'s iPhone and Research in Motion Ltd.'s BlackBerry devices.
But the company has struggled to sign up players such as Samsung, the world's second-biggest cellphone maker by sales, and Nokia Corp., the biggest, which it has also sued.
The case before the ITC covered a high-speed broadband technology called 3G used in Samsung's Blackjack II and Instinct handsets. Analysts believe that so-called smartphones will be the most resilient part of the global cellphone market, which is expected to contract next year.
"If Samsung wants to remain competitive where the cellphone industry is growing, it needs to use InterDigital's intellectual property," said Chris Colarik, portfolio manager at Glenmede Trust, a Philadelphia investment-management firm that holds shares in InterDigital. "At the 11th hour, it appears that they are not willing to risk losing the ability to sell their advanced cellphones in the U.S."
Engineers who went on to found Qualcomm Inc. developed InterDigital's patents in the 1980s, when InterDigital set out to offer wireless telephony in rural areas. InterDigital never became a major player in telecom equipment but holds an array of patents for wireless technologies, and now makes semiconductors.
According to a statement issued late Monday, the Samsung settlement, which runs through 2012, also covers an earlier technology known as 2G, for which Samsung last year posted a $167 million bond. The companies didn't release the value of the settlement, which requires Samsung to choose one of two payment options within the next 45 days. Both companies have agreed to drop all litigation and arbitration once InterDigital receives its first payment.
Tom Carpenter, a telecom analyst at Hilliard Lyons who owns shares in InterDigital, estimates the value of Samsung's settlement at $400 million to $500 million over the next five years. Samsung sold 87 million 3G phones from 2004 through June 2008, while Nokia sold 142 million, according to IDC's Mobile Phone Tracker. The research firm projects that 3G phone sales will increase from 314 million this year to 721 million in 2012.
InterDigital last year filed a similar infringement case against Nokia, which is the largest maker of 3G phones. A judge is set to hear evidence in May 2009 and rule in August, with the full ITC ruling due by mid-December. InterDigital won a $253 million payment from Nokia in 2006.
Nokia declined to comment.
InterDigital shares were up 13% at $29 in after-hours trading, after jumping 24% to $25.68 on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
Write to Sara Silver at sara.silver@wsj.com
InterDigital, Samsung Appear Close to Settlement
By SARA SILVER
* Article
* Comments
more in Telecom »
* Email
* Printer Friendly
* Share:
o Yahoo Buzz more
o facebook
o MySpace
o LinkedIn
o Digg
o del.icio.us
o NewsVine
o StumbleUpon
o Mixx
* smaller Text Size larger
*
InterDigital Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. on Monday asked the U.S. International Trade Commission to stay a decision due Tuesday in their patent infringement dispute, suggesting that the two parties are close to reaching a settlement in the case.
InterDigital, of King of Prussia, Pa., owns an array of patents for wireless technologies, including roaming and other functions in basic cellphones that have generated more than $1.5 billion in licensing fees since 2000.
The company last year filed suit against Samsung, the world's No. 2 cellphone maker by sales, claiming that the South Korean company infringed on five of its patents related to high-speed broadband technology called 3G. Although the ITC has no power to fine the company, it can issue a ban on the importation of products containing the disputed technology.
"In order to ask for such a postponement, a judge will require that you are close to a settlement," said Tom Carpenter, a telecom analyst at Hilliard Lyons in Louisville, Ky. Mr. Carpenter, who owns shares in InterDigital, estimates that Samsung could agree to pay royalties of 50 cents per phone.
Samsung shipped 58.1 million phones in the third quarter, or 17% of the global total of 303 million cellphones, according to the market research firm Strategy Analytics. InterDigital last year filed a similar case against Nokia Corp., the world's largest maker of cellphones, with 39% share, claiming infringement on four patents. That case is still pending.
In earlier cases over a technology known as 2G, InterDigital won a $253 million payment from Nokia in 2006 and forced Samsung to post a $167 million bond in December, pending appeal of an arbitration.
Write to Sara Silver at sara.silver@wsj.com
If this was potentially bad news, you can guarantee the DJ newswires would have reported it already. The stock is up over 15% and not a word from them. What a shock.
Hopefully they didn't ask for more than a week extension. If they don't hold Sammy's feet to the fire, this will drag on forever as it already has. They have had 10 years to negotiate a deal, it can't take more than a week to finalize one now after all this time has passed. Give us an 8k stating that a deal is done already. How high do we go with a good deal in this market where everyone is looking for a ray of light in a very dreary market? Good luck KoP in getting us the best deal possible in the quickest amount of time. My stomach can't take much more of this.
Our day is coming all, and now it sure seems like it is just around the corner.
Message In Reply To:
please, oh fates, give us an 8k for substantial progress
essentialy complete...
Silly question, but that is the Sammy case and not the Nokia case, correct?
Will we be appearing on this list today? Tomorrow? Hopefully it is because of an imbalance of buy orders.
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=TradeHalts
Good morning Jim. As we sit on the verge of the biggest decision to come in the company's history for the past 13 years, I want to say THANK YOU for your efforts over the years keeping your boards the best on the net. Without you and the unselfish efforts of all the great contributors on this board I know I would not have known hardly anything about this company. At least we have had an opportunity to be informed to help us with our dd due to all your efforts.
Hopefully the decision comes our way and the tone of the posts from the attorneys here leads me to believe we are going to win tomorrow. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Thank you to all who have been able to look at both sides of an issue and speak up on its merits and share reasoned and well thought out opinions. To those who have just been out to fight and argue, you know what you can do to yourself, you will always be losers. The amount of fighting that has gone on every time dmiller posts is ridiculous. Some fight him no matter what he says even though IMO he has been right more times than not. That being said, I think he will be wrong this time around in his latest prediction.
This board and most of its members have been the dream team of internet boards bringing together investors with all levels of knowledge and experience who have shared their experiences unselfishly. GOOD LUCK TO ALL and hopefully we get the decision that we want. Due to the uncertainty in the overall markets, my hope is that we get a settlement announcement today but management may feel we need a court victory to secure the rest of the potential licensees such as Nokia, Motorola and Ericy. They are the ones who know what kind of cards are in our hand right now, let's hope we have a fair and impartial judge this time around if it gets that far.
For the life of me, I can't see how both parties haven't settled this thing yet. There is extreme risk to both parties if they don't settle. Sammy loses and their future royalty costs to IDCC could easily double IMO. IDCC loses and, well I don't want to even consider what would happen but it would be huge. Thanks for sharing your thoughts because it makes me feel better. Good luck to all this week, it will be interesting to say the least.
Message In Reply To:
More thoughts on FRAND--The concept of FRAND has been discussed a great deal, but, to the best of my knowledge, no court has ruled on what it means, so at this point there is great ambiguity that entities such as Nokia, Samsung and others have been using as leverage. Once there is a decision, that ambiguity will diminish. It may very well be that Nokia and Samsung would hate to see an actual decision, if there was a risk that such a decision went against them; not only with respect to their dispute with IDCC, but there dispute with other smaller patent holders. If the ALJ were to issue a firm decision against their concept of FRAND, that could have severe consequences beyond their dispute with IDCC.
Factors that are important in any contract theory, even French law (under the Civil Code) are the concepts of consideration and fairness. For the life of me, under Samsung/Nokia's theory, I do not know what consideration or benefits any patent holder receives by declaring patents as essential under ETSI. If you declare patents as essential, ETSI makes no determination to corroborate that fact. Under ETSI, parties are not obligated to accept those patents as valid or actually incorporated into the standard. They are free to challenge validity and infringement. These parties do benefit to the extent that they are put on notice that the patent holder believes that the patent is essential (no patent ambush), but what does the patent holder receive in exchange? The patent holder is still required to bring legal action against members to prove that the patent is valid and infringed and then seek damages. I could see Samsung's theory of equitable estoppel, i.e. a party has a license and the holder must sue for damages, if Samsung was bound to accept the patent as essential. But without that type of consideration given to the patent holder, I see patent holders as receiving no value from a declaration of essentiality. I also see it as being fundamentally unfair to patent holders for any court to apply Samsung's theory to a patent holder. From the transcript snippets that I have seen, I think IDCC has made this case to the ALJ, so Samsung and Nokia clearly should see this risk. I recognize that I am biased on this issue and have tried to see the other side, but I have not been successful. Again, no one should invest based on my analysis because, even subconsciously, I am biased in favor of IDCC. IMHO
Olddog, do you know if the ALJ has ever issued his decision prior to the expected date? Is there any possibility that on Monday morning we could wake up to a decision from the ALJ or will he use all available time to release his decision on Tuesday? Will he wait to see if the parties were able to settle this mess over the weekend before issuing his decision?
If I weren't at work, I would have been too LOL.
Message In Reply To:
Dessert Dweller -
Speak for yourself, I have been drinking since 8AM
If there was ever a time that I wish IDCC would announce a deal, today is it. Going through the weekend not knowing what we will find out next week will drive many of us to drink LOL. I for one have never been as nervous owning IDCC before, even when it hit $5 back in 2001 after hitting $80 2 years earlier and I am sure I am not alone in my feeling. I would love to see something released during market hours towards the end of the day.
The stock would be higher if the rumors were credible. Right now it is business as usual at KoP, extreme silence and no leaks in regards to negotiations status. They have never leaked news before and it is unlikely they will start now unless it comes from the other side. I would not expect any announcement until Tuesday at the earliest. This weekend I would imagine they will be working overtime to get a deal done that is in the best interests of both parties otherwise they will both roll the dice and it will come up snake eyes for one of them. Let's hope we are on the winning side. Good luck to all, in any type of market this would be tough, with the market we are in now, it is even more tough.
Message In Reply To:
There's rumors circulating on some of the boards
What other boards i wonder? AB, ihub, ivillage? Didn't see it there. Are there other boards more in tune than this one, that a rumor like that is to be believed?
whizzer, I am sure this has been discussed but so much has been discussed over the years that I am unsure of something. Is it the judge that recommends the ban of products or will we have to wait for the commission to rule? Basically what I am asking is when the judge issues his ruling next week assuming he sides with us fully, can we expect him to recommend a ban at the same time or will that come later? Thanks and good luck all.
Message In Reply To:
Jimylee--It is important to note that although the staff attorney took the position that there was no violation, he did not agree that there was an implied license. As I recall from posts from the hearing transcript, the ALJ asked him the question and he said there was no implied license. Instead, the staff attorney's view was that IDCC was equitably estopped from relying on the license. There is an important distinction between the two, which I have previously posted on. In part, equitable estoppel requires that Samsung have "clean hands" in the matter and also, that as a result of the ETSI FRAND requirements, it is reasonable to bar patent holders like IDCC from asserting their patents in an infringement action. IMHO
If you call back the number apparently they ask you to identify yourself by providing personal information and some people give them their social security number, date of birth etc. Obviously they shouldn't but it must work on some people and they fall for it.
Message In Reply To:
How does that steal you identity?
OT: Identity theft warning. I recently received several automated phone calls looking for my ex sister in law. I passed along the message to her thinking it could be something important then my wife looked it up on Google and found out it is a total scam the purpose of which is to steal your identity. The phone call goes as follows:
"Yes, this is Peter Bronson, my office has received paperwork to be processed and has this number as a contact number for JOHN/JANE DOE. At this point it is extremely urgent that this person or their legal representative contacts the office IMMEDIATELY. This is regarding Case # 123456. At this point it is extremely urgent that this individual or their legal representative contacts the office immediately. The office number is 1-866-374-6604. Again the office number is 1-866-374-6604. You may also press 2 to replay this message. I thank you, it is urgent."
Pass the above along so others don't mistakenly fall for it.
I hope it is not a fixed dollar amount spread over several years because that is no different than a lump sum payment which is what we have with LG. It doesn't give rise to potential increases in future earnings since the revenue will be straight lined. Companies that can't show future increases in earnings get lower multiples than those that can show higher revenues in earnings as 3g overtakes 2g sales. The LG agreement was good at the time but now we need a royalty rate applied to all 3g sales as they are done to give the highest possible multiple and share price to IDCC. We also need an agreement that goes longer than 5 years with the thieving b@stards so we are not back in court in a few short years IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Loop re lump sum settlement
I didn't mean to imply that I thought IDCC was after a lump-sum settlement. What I think IDCC is really after is a desired 3G royalty rate going forward, so as to substantially increase the quarterly earnings per share on an ongoing/recurring basis. The poker pot for 3G is the desired royalty rate, not a lump-sum payment. If Samsung gets close enough to the desired royalty rate, I agree that IDCC will probably accept it.
For DingBatts, it will all depend on which side the coin ends up. To my knowledge she still hasn't issued a written ruling on how she justified that BS decision the first time so my guess is she flipped a coin or worse, she was bought and paid for by Nokia in which case we will need to go back to appeals again after she rules in favor of them again. She is useless and dangerous IMO.
Message In Reply To:
O'dog this action by Nokia to get back in front of the District Court confirms for me that Nokia is scared as hell of what is going to happen at the ITC. By their very actions they act as if they know they are guilty of infringing those patents. And again want to delay and possibly not pay.
Let us hope this time that Judge Batt does the right thing and not step on the appeals court judges.
What's up with this? We have to go back to DingBatts court?
"On October 27, 2008, the arbitral tribunal notified the parties that the drafting of the Terms of Reference for the arbitration is postponed until such time as the status conference before Judge Batts in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has been held (see “Samsung and Nokia United States International Trade Commission (‘USITC’ or the ‘Commission’) Proceedings and Related Delaware District Court Proceedings” above)."
I was wondering how long it would take to come up with the negatives. The reality is they did miss revenue expectations and the only reason they exceeded expectations is because they guided much higher than actual on the expense line. Hopefully the 3rd qtr level is what we experience in the 4th qtr and it will be great as far as expenses go. But what if they miss guidance on the expense side the other way next time?
The cc was very confident sounding and the current strength actually means nothing at this point. As everyone here knows, it all rests on the 25th of Nov. Place your bets and lets keep our fingers crossed that the decision goes as expected, 100% in our direction. Happy Halloween all.
Message In Reply To:
JD
I know you are not going to like this headline. From Schwab:
nterDigital (IDCC) Reports Mixed Q3 Earnings
7:48 AM EDT October 31, 2008
InterDigital, Inc. (NASDAQ: IDCC) reports Q3 EPS of $0.16, versus the analyst estimate of $0.09. Revenue for the quarter was $55.1 million, versus the consensus of $57.45 million.
mo
even a broken clock is right 2 times a day which is more than you have been right in your predictions to date even if I give you this one.
I would have to think this is talking about Apple and Infineon as it relates to IDCC's IP. I could be totally wrong but I would think the IP in IDCC's SlimChip modem IP is in the Apple phone of which they sold something like 6 million for the quarter ending 9/30 which will be reported in IDCC's 4th qtr.
Message In Reply To:
As for the fourth quarter, we will provide an update on our revenue expectations after we receive and review the applicable patent license and product sales royalty reports and update our forecasts on anticipated revenue from work associated with technology solutions agreements. At this point, we are very encouraged by strong sales of our licensees’ products containing our SlimChip modem IP,” concluded Mr. McQuilkin.
What was consensus on revenue? They had previously guided $54-57 million.
is "partnership" code for they are exploring a sale of the entire company? I hope it doesn't happen and if it does, hopefully it is not until after both Sammy and Nokia are licensed.
Message In Reply To:
well, the following is the reason why the ER came out so late, IMO. The company keeps changing business model.
“While we are pleased with the progress of SlimChip, the landscape of suppliers and customers of digital baseband technology is evolving rapidly and we must keep pace with this change. Consequently, we are evaluating a number of options for the modem business in line with our focus to create shareholder value. These options could include an acquisition or a partnership to achieve the appropriate scale needed to succeed in the market, as well as the sale of that part of our business to a company that requires a world class modem solution.”
IF the company is waiting until 8 to release the earnings it would have to mean that something very significant is included. Whether that is a good something or a bad something remains to be seen.
I still think it is because they just haven't gotten around to getting 'er done. Unless there is a valid reason for this delay, this is another example of how the company really is piss poor in its communications. Hopefully it is because something special is about to be announced, I type this with crossed fingers but I am not bothering to hold my breath (it would interfere with the drinking LOL).
Message In Reply To:
Only 25 minutes left on extended hours trading. Makes me feel more and more like somethings up anyway you want to cut it especially without a statement. This just doesn't seem normal. Maybe right after 8pm. mo. .. . nic