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.
I feel that one crucial question either has never been asked of management or at least never answered and that is:What is the major stumbling block to getting the remaining MAJOR oems signed to a 3g license? Is it simply agreement on rate or structure of the license or is it something deeper regarding essentiality of IDCC's ipr to the functioning of 3g.Of course we already are aware of nok's bogus attempts in this particular direction, but if this is really an issue that needs to be reconciled and defined before going forward on rates and licensing,then we are in for one LONG haul before realizing revenues from the big boys.I feel that management needs to clarify this point to its investors immediately,because if not,we may be in for the same bs we dealt with and are still dealing with in 2g.If anyone has the answers to the above questions or feels as I do that we are owed these answers, then the next step is to formulate a plan to get someone to respond.
Does anyone here have any creative ideas as to what(when & why)will cause this stalemate(or stallmate) we are in,to be broken?We are about to enter 2007 and frustration is definitely setting in re:new 3g licenses-particularly the large oems.What is going to be the watershed event to break this logjam and when can we expect it? The endless claims and counter claims within the industry seems to be a stall tactic rather then any substantial event that will define progress going forward.IDCC seems to be caught between a rock and hard place because no major oem wants to be the one to step out and recognize the rightful place we should have in 3g technology.It's as if everone knows a major shoe is going to drop soon that will define 3g licensing, but until it does, no one is in any hurry to make a move.Will we have to wait for qcom and nok to settle their differences or will one or the other make a move concerning IDCC to either define FRAND(nok license)or strengthen their ipr demands(qcom buying IDCC)?The worst case scenario,in my opinion,is having to wait beyond April for this thing to play out between qcom/nok.The time element is becoming crucial to valuing this stock and litigating will only lenghthen the problem.I'm sure all of us thought we would be further ahead at this juncture,and the way I read this is, we are at a sh*t or get off the pot time.If you can't beat em join em!
Sinnet14-I think #5 was the key, but there has to be something more that IDCC will benefit from at a later date.To give up a triggered license for 3g with nok, IDCC must have received something in return.Because no company wanted to be the trigger,the hint of collusion was in the air-especially with the group openly trying to cap royalties.Maybe there's a smoking gun out there and nok knows it.The only way out is for the 2 companies to agree to nullify the previous contract,negotiate a new 3g contract, while nok uses IDCC's patent portfolio as leverage to downplay the importance of qcom's patents to the 3g standards.My guess is that nok will license with IDCC before it renegotiates with qcom.This compromise would be much better from a time standpoint than to trigger and go thru that mess again, while allowing more creativity in structuring a 3g license.
You guys are missing the point:Any time anyone takes a major position in a stock, an exit strategy has to be in place, and is exacerbated when supply is low. On the positive side, I think that was one of the major stumbling blocks to past institutional ownership increasing-how do we get out, if things don't pan out as expected? Our notoriety has increased substantially, but something else has changed regarding the perception of our company, and the risk/reward factor seems to be tilted in our favor.I may be totally wrong,but it seems that more professional buyers are seeing a limited downside risk, and I think it is because they know that at a worst case scenario,the patent portfolio is a valuable commodity to any number of buyers out there in wireless.Saying it will or won't happen, won't make it so,but a perception that someone may be interested in acquiring a company helps stabalize the downside risk, while allowing for a major run up.Again, just some musing on my part,and I don't have any info to back it up,but it does feel different this time.
Re:Institutional ownership-The question I have is,what happens when multiple institutional owners want to get out at the same time? An overload on the sell side could devastate the price,with recovery time being very long,especially if some sort of negative news precipitated the sell.Does anyone have any thoughts or can point to other examples of companies with a small number of shares available that has majority ownership by institutions? Then again,maybe the institutional owners never plan to sell or know they never will have to sell, because their conclusion is that the company will be bought out.Just another perspective-so don't go crazy saying it won't happen.
Olddog-Thanks for response re 4th qtr consensus.Does anyone here know what nok would be lacking in 3g if it signed a license with IDCC-specifically,what qcom would have left to offer to the mix that would be critical to the operation of 3g? In the back of my mind,our settlement with nok still lingers-particularly the time scenario, and how this strategically fits into nok's plan to deal with qcom. Inking a deal with IDCC in the first qtr of 07 would allow nok to ramp up the pressure on qcom by using the concept of proportionality in its negotiations.Hope I am right in thinking that we could be the wild card in nok/qcom rate dispute and that was part of the deal when we negotiated nok settlement and it looked like we gave up 3g triggered contract for nothing.COMMENTS PLEASE!
Question:Is .82/share a consensus for 4th quarter earnings and if so what happened in 3rd quarter to justify a double in earnings from 3rd to 4th qtr? Are they factoring in Sam arb award to get this figure? THANKS
Thanks for responses regarding non-recurring royalties in 2007.Any thoughts as to how we make up for the loss of approximately 20 mil of the 67 mil reported for 3rd qtr? I realize that we are lagging a quarter behind, so hopefully the numbers will increase from other paying licensees,but I believe LG is fixed and some of the others have seen market share decrease, while HTC is making huge strides.Samsung 2g payment should hit early 2007,but how would it be accounted for? The obvious solution is more 3g licenses and the sooner the better,because however unfair it may be, any perception of declining revenues is always treated harshly by Wall Street.Comments please.
Can anyone tell me how much of our current revenue will be non-recurring begining in Jan 2007?THANKS
Of the 57+ mil in revenue for this past qtr,how much is attributed to licenses that will be fully paid at the end of 2006? I believe nok 2g is 12.5 mil, but the rest of it I'm not sure of. Any help would be appreciated.tia
Nokiashill-Just remember there is more than one way to monetize an asset and if leasing out that asset(LICENSING)becomes an inefficient use of the asset then selling that asset can become an option.We are in a sweet spot in the wireless sector with patented ipr in air interface, that I imagine any new player such as msft,dell or cisco would love to own and use as cross licensing.We don't have to sell the company,but we could sell a patent or family of patents to the highest bidder and make out better than licensing.Creativity is a must in monetizing our ipr and the opportunity is the best it has ever been.VALUE isn't just an income stream that makes life easy for analysts and we have value right now in the wireless industry- that is only going to explode.
So what is fundamentally different today from yesterday, last week etc.-answer-NOTHING!The only difference is one of perception and that perception is TIME.We live in a what have you done for me lately world and expectations are short term biased with little or no patience.IMO-The showdown is under way,and SAM's latest attempt at delay is a part of the strategy Nok etal are using to squeeze qcom and IDCC.The desired result is to see QCOM and IDCC become one, and so many of the industry's problems suddenly disappear.Keeping IDCC's share price in a manageable range allows for a double to be palateable for both buyer and seller.One way to rationalize the decision will be the difficult environment companies such as ours faces enforcing its' patents and the time element it takes to do so.The sad part of all this will be that long term holders have had to shoulder all the risk, while I'm sure those privy to what is going on behind the scenes,will scoop up a nice double without any angst.Please don't respond to this post, by bashing my opinion of a buyout, because it is this prospect ,imo, that will keep our share price within reason, and be a threat to shorts etc.The prospect of waking up one morning to the news of an offer would create an avalanche on the shorts.The key question is to whom does our ipr present the most value and in what form will that value be realized? Tune in-2007 should be very exciting.
We seem to be in a stalemate period as nok runs its 4 corner offense with the shot clock off.I'm trying to figure out what event can trigger some more 3g licenses and particularly the signing of nok,mot,se.What sticks in my mind is the timing and structure of our settlement with nok.The most important part of the settlement,imo,was the clean slate that nok and idcc agreed upon re 3g.So who did this benefit most and why did nok agree to settle back in april when they could have dragged this on at least till the end of this year? Nok knew it could easily be triggered with the old agreement and a long drawn out process would ensue that wouldn't be beneficial to either party.Basically it gave nok a year to haggle with qcom over rates without being encumbered by a triggered rate that would only strengthen qcom's rate claims.But what did nok promise idcc in return for starting fresh,and could this be the catalyst to start a dominoe affect of signings for idcc.I feel that Lanham etc. is just a smoke screen and that will be dropped as a part of a new 3g agreement between the 2 companies.My remaining question is when this will happen,before or after nok and q settle their differences? My guess is that a new stucture is needed in licensing ipr and nok and idcc will hammer out the protocol agreement and nok will use this to set a precedent for FRAND.Something is brewing,because if it wasn't,I'm sure lawsuits would be filed to enforce our position.This is THE opportunity we have been waiting for to take a leadership position in licensing our ipr and I believe our management is well aware of it and will surprise us all with foresight and creativity in structuring new deals.The WHEN can't come soon enough, but it seems that the market senses change as well.gltal
Whizzer-Thanks for your technical input and please keep us posted if you see that the indicators are met and show strong move or breakout either way.
Any technical analysts or chartists out there that can tell us where the next point of resistance should be? I had read that once thru 36 it was clear sailing into the 40's, but not sure this is correct.What a great run and nice to see us finally getting national recognition as a stock to own.Any major news, with the charts in our favor, could spur a short covering like we've never seen.gltal
Somewhere I read that Nok and Qcom are in arbitration. Does anyone know at what stage they are in and what is projected date of deliberation? I believe that April 2007 their current agreement ends and that Nok states they are in no hurry to license further.Will this arbitration determine what is fair and reasonable going forward or are we talking something completely different with regards to what this arb is determining? tia
Anyone want to guess where any surprise may come regarding 3rd quarter earnings? Since we are talking 2nd quarter numbers to produce 3rd quarter earnings, what company(ies)may have had better numbers than the analysts are counting on? Maybe expenses will be lower, but that doesn't seem to happen often.Absent any positive news regarding new licensees,just meeting expectations won't be enough to sustain this price,unless they expect a healthy jump in 4th quarter earnings.Punching thru 36 and maintaning seems to be a huge technical underpinning that could propel us into the 40's with a samsung 3g contract.Don't want to visit the 20's again, so hopefully there is something out there to beat the .40 3rd quarter number or news to fuel the price upward.gltal
robweis-10+ million shares traded out of the blue and no news with a 30% drop in price is the proof -and why the nasd is supposedly looking into it.Who all the players are, I have no idea, nor without any resources could I prove it,but pretending that this was just a normal correction and just seemed like a good day to liquidate a position is very naieve. Maybe, someday we will find out the truth, but probably not-keep believing that all information is equally available to everyone at the same time.NOT!
mschere-Good one on the e-mail, but I have a feeling you may have been seeing the same barber on July 10th, unless of course you are a day trader in the know.
robweis-No, I didn't get stopped out, nor did I sell and I have recovered my position back to prior the fall-my point is that the price drop was well orchestrated and that people such as myself took the real risks while others that were part of this scheme were afforded a very suspicious and almost no risk entry point in the matter of 2 days, while it took 3 months to recover and virtually no news has transpired since.Samsung arb win was priced in before the announced decision(excluding any 3g license).
Yah Rob,you knew the stock would drop 10 points and were just waiting to buy on the dip.So since you are in the know, now what-sell, knowing another 10 pointer is coming or is it different this time? Give us your little guy wisdom, so I personally can avoid another $700,000 haircut to my portfolio.TIA
Would love to see us break the mold tomorrow and instead of drifting back to $35,break thru and close above $36.There just seems to be something different this time-a different feel and pattern to the price movement.Maybe wishful thinking on my part,but I think major news is just around the corner-and of course we will be the last to know.
Our continued strength is very impressive and makes me all the more curious as to what was really behind the July 7th and 10th action relating to pj downngrade.Supposedly the nasd was looking into the situation that created 10 million shares traded on july 10th out of nowhere and without substantial news.My first reaction was,who benefitted from the drop by being short, but now I'm wondering who did this create a magnificent buying opportunity for? It has taken us 3 months to get back to where we were, but now, from all indications our institutional ownership has increased.What a fortuitous event, for those able to bag the 10 points without any change in fundamentals and be on the cusp of a major pop- that seems to be hinted at with this impressive strength.As long as we get our just due, I guess that the pj incident will simply be a blip on the radar screen,but it still irritates me that the little guy is always the bag holder and true risk taker,while things seem to be set up for those in the know.jmho
Data Rox-I see you were the guest on the Late Night Show with Raymond-who does he have on tonight? lol
No clue whatsoever-how about you F6?
Can't get one by you Arthritis, you old sharpie you.You really put me in my place.Your characterization of me couldn't be more wrong, but that's okay because we both want the same thing-maximization of IDCC's value to its shareholders-we just disagree on how that will happen, but either way is fine with me.I have a very large stake in this company and I too believe in its goods and management, but I just don't see it continuing as a stand alone for a long period of time.Cut me some slack for seeing a different means to a profitable end.jmho
Arthritis-That was for you only pal,since you've never posted an original idea on your own, there is no use in responding to you after this-or maybe your next post-or the next!lol
MG-You obviously never watched SEINFELD-just an attempt at humor since you included my responses to responses in your rundown.Let it die!
Revlis-Earnings come from monetizing assets and our asset is our ipr and the value it can bring either in the form of an income stream from licensing(later requiring new patents to generate new licenses)or (don't read, arthritis,magilla)selling our ipr to a buyer(dirty word,sorry).
Gorilla-You double dipped and even triple dipped the chip, but I get it,no more talk about real ultimate VALUE.lol
Arthritis63-There is no agenda,but it sure seems to irritate you when the very real possibility of a buyout is mentioned.All that I was trying to find out was what company could most benefit from owning our technology.Keep your head in the sand and pretend that this R&D company with no assets other than the cash on hand and its patent portfolio, with 315 employees, is worth 10+ billion and while you are at it give the names of like R&D firms of this size in the 10 billion market cap status.Won't bring it up again, but when the first offer is made-told you so.Adios.
dndodd-So would I like to see 5-10 billion, but it won't happen unless we invent the killer patent that everyone has to have and then that would be cheap.The point of the premise is that value in our case will be recognized someday for enterprise value rather than income stream.All it will take is one legitimate offer to get the ball rolling and I don't think companies of interest will wait till IDCC gets to $50 on its own.JMHO, but I think we will see something before 2007 is finished.
Since the board is slow and I believe that the ultimate value of IDCC will be determined by its worth to another company,where is our best fit or who needs us the most? I don't have a technical background, but it seems that IDCC has a headstart on the industry regarding 3g technology and has patents in many of the areas of interest to China etc.With this wide array of technology, it seems that no matter which way the world goes, IDCC has patented IPR that should be able to be monetized.With a low number of outstanding shares,a $3 billion investment by another player should be a no brainer and I would think that the wireless community knows very well what IDCC has.ERIC,NOK,LU and now SAMSUNG have lost to IDCC in areas that are not IDCC's strong suit.Wall street wants to value IDCC on earning streams, but in my opinion is missing the true value that IDCC will ultimately bring and that is the VALUE of its total ipr package to a major player in wireless.My first reaction is that Sam is way behind in R&D and could use our ipr to cross license,and rather than pay 2g monies along with a 3g license, why not make an offer? Qcom seems to be lacking the same punch they had in cdma and is having a difficult time commanding the same margins in 3g-would IDCC's ipr compliment their own and give them new clout? Maybe a newcomer like MSFT,DELL, or CSCO would benefit from controlling our patents?Anyway,it's going to happen some day and I would expect sooner rather than later with our stock in the mid 30's-let the bidding begin.Let's hear some thoughts on who would be most logical to make a bid.
Can anyone update us as to where we stand in our process to enforce payment from Samsung-ie future dates for either hearings or decisions from court? TIA
L2V-Following up on your thoughts-What scenario would lead to a win/win for the industry? My conclusions always lead me back to someone buying IDCC and incorporating the costs in cross licensing agreements. I know that this isn't what a lot of posters want to hear, but it just seems too logical.The time is nearing if someone wants to take a run at us and make $60-80/share look good to shareholders.Who needs us the most and what price is reasonable for both parties? The industry can not afford another qcom dipping into its' pockets, so I expect we will start hearing talk in the coming year of further consolidation and IDCC should be a hot topic.JMHO
IMO-IDCC has an unprecedented opportunity to take the lead in structuring license agreements that become the example of FRAND.While qcom dukes it out with the industry,we have a window open to us that I hope management recognizes and takes advantage of,because it is not business as usual in wireless.Long, drawn out litigation is not the way to maximize our value. We have shown that we can win in court and win big, so I believe that the unlicensed players know that litigation is a loser for them as well.A creative approach is needed to partner with the major players in providing on going ipr for the industry at a cost that everyone can live with.Because so much falls to the bottom line,I think we should be able to be flexible in structuring licenses that the industry worlwide can use as an example in dealing with qcom.The window is open, but we don't know for how long,so please Mr. Merritt etal, be flexible and fair and take advantage of this great opportunity to maximize shareholder value.
There seems to be a new and clear message being sent by the legal system to the bullies of wireless,that they had better negotiate their differences or dire consequences are to follow.I would expect that qcom and Broadcom will come to an agreement soon and that nok and qcom will do the same by April.This all bodes well for IDCC,imo,because hopefully cooperation will become the theme, and IDCC can be seen as a facilitator for wireless solutions.Protection of IPR is mandatory for the US in global markets and the ongoing evolution of wireless.Since negotiation is inevitable, I would expect that a Sam announcement of settlement of 2g monies and a new 3g agreement will open the floodgates.I think IDCC will deviate from the norm and be creative in structuring the agreement and this will act as a catalyst for qcom and nok to settle their differences.A new game is about to begin and IDCC is in the catbird seat.Just a feeling,but I think something major is about to happen.JMHO
Wilco-My broker says it's the j70k rally from yesterday's discussion. LOL
Evidently arthritis, there isn't much I can say to convince you that I don't have an agenda or are somehow connected(at least in your mind) to corp buyer.I am merely trying to posit possibilities of where the industry and IDCC are headed. I don't have a crystal ball,and if I did I'd be a billionaire, instead of a multi-INTERDIGITALIONAIRE.
Arthritis63-Actually I'm pro management and voted against corp's proposals.I think Merritt and gang are doing an excellent job, but I am a realist and just don't see IDCC becoming another qcom.Our number of shares outstanding just begs for a suitor and with all the problems going forward, to extract royalties as an ipr holder of our size, has become a lengthy process that exposes investors to too many variables for unscrupulous market thieves to take advantage.I don't have an agenda and am merely tossing out a perspective that I think is sorely missing on this board.