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 luck! as I said not here at all to bash have been reading intently and am happy I didn't jump in around the 20 cent mark... Lost enough in patent plays already.
As long as they have the oppty for money on a go forward basis WDDD is still ridiculously undervalued so while there's risk there is still upside.
As someone not in it, I think its more prudent to wait...
am I the only one who thinks prkr has run waaay to far on a verdict? haven't followed the case but i could see it get hit hard here on the news unless they get awarded 500-1bn - which would make them one of the largest awards ever!
yes it has been edgx and that mm has been active today on the long side which is what led me to that view....
we'll see, as i said, bigger orders is nice to see regardless (hasn't translated into higher volume overall but someone is buying in 'size') so its either covering or a tut!
I understand that but from my limited read of the issues I dont think that will be the case. I think what may be the short end of the stick for longs here is that they simply dont get the 'past damages'....
but msj will tell us no point in either of us speculating as we are not patent attorneys
Ah I see, well I am no lawyer and have no position and have been watching to see if I should enter as I said.
I'm not sure the entire case would be dismissed, perhaps the past six years (similar to the laches issue on vrng) but from what I understood this has no bearing on damages since the the patent was changed/new certificate granted, to the end date of the patent so there is still big upside here just not as much (gee sounds familiar!)
regardless, not being a lawyer puts me in a position where its simply a guess/lotto play and as I said, i've done that once and not willing to now.
I will revisit after the judge rules on the msj!
I'm staying out...already played the lotto and still losing on vrng lol...rather miss a bit of the jump but still get a nice return if the msj is denied...
do you think a big short is going to cover in one shot? nope...they are smart/hide their moves
limit orders
sizable but not big enough to tip anyone off
do it slowly over a number of days/weeks
especially in a low volume stock. If you're short 2-3 ml shares are you going to cover all at once when there are 800k shares of volume per day? no chance because you move the market, even if you simply has just a sizable short position (500-1ml shares)
nope...you chip away a little per day and play the patient game and the pps isn't affected by your covering.
and what would be your explanation for the increase in sizable buys today? I have been watching level 2 for months and there has seldom been buys the size I saw this morning at limits (ie not market./chasing so not retail), could potentially be a tut buying if so, is just as good news, if not better.
But its really only one of those 2 options in my view...but it is noticeable and outside the recent norm for this stock, which is why I mentioned it....
Personally, I'd prefer to be wrong and have it be tut accumulating! just better for longs!
Presentation vs substance...doesn't really matter, they have briefs she will read, precedents she will review, case facts etc.
While ATVI's legal team certainly was more polished, as a bystander thinking to enter I am more concerned about the legal arguments and precedents used.
ATVI's attorney can grandstand like perry mason all he wants, what matters is the law, and unfortunately, there seems to be ALOT of conflicting arguments here, so for me its hard to decipher.
Personally, I think the risk is too high for me at this point given my losses in vrng and another potential binary outcome here (and my lack of REAL DEPTH / LAWYER level understanding of patent law).
Makes more sense to me to wait until the MSJ is addressed and if so dive in!
Good luck to the longs here
I am no lawyer either but there are implications from here addressing that issue (the markman) in any other way than she did.
1. She is an impartial arbiter correct? Well ATVI is effectively trying to have the case thrown out and there is potential (not putting any odds/views here on that) but there is 'potential' for that, I think we can all agree that is a possible outcome (whatever the probability).
2. Therefore, if she sets a markman date now, before ruling on the MSJ she signals she has already made a decision (Implicitly) from setting that date, without further review of the case facts, precedents etc.
3. Therefore, she did the absolute correct thing, gave the right response by simply saying we'll cross that bridge when we come to it there are mitigating issues we need to address first.
Nothing to read or not read into here, it was by the book.
Lol...yes did you hear? Google has had cash issues for decades, server space is expensive ;) LOL
Looks like its a short covering, last month or so we've seen small trades, few blocks etc...(retail)
today I am seeing a number of 10k plus trades on the buy side along with alot in the 3-8k size...
Also edgx has been active on the buy side and has 'typically' been the shorters MM...
interesting...quietly exiting, smart.
Not sure how many here watch level 2 but there are alot of big block buys going through today...
Hmm shorts covering or tuts buying? Definitely limit orders because they aren't moving when the mm's trying push the pps to get them to bite...
interesting
Thanks for the post and insight, I have been watching/reading and thinking of an entry point for a while and certainly this dip has provided an opportunity, but now am concerned, looking forward to your views as I have been reading your posts.
Not sure if you posted the link but I watched in its entirety and I do see why there was a sell off. While some call it 'panic' I like to call it acknowledging a new level of risk here.
Not trying to bash by any means, that is not my nature but as an objective bystander who has taken his lumps in VRNG, I have learned one thing about patent plays, already high risk and any additional risk that has not been 'identified' hammers the stock (especially when its mainly retail and here its 100% retail last time I checked).
That video is interesting and since I am no lawyer, just fairly experienced with legal processes/documents, it is challenging for me to want to enter at this stage. Perhaps this sell off has incorporated this risk already but my concern would be is if the MSJ is not denied what happens.
I do believe, as you mentioned, the issues brought forth should have no effect on the case from the date of the certificate of correction forward so on that basis there is still a great deal of upside here, but given what I saw in VRNG, clerical errors are never good to the plaintiff, and seem to benefit the infringer more than anything.
Alot of money at stake so this MSJ is huge. I do think if the MSJ is denied you will see a move upwards here but at this stage its a coin flip and probably one non-lawyers are not willing to take and therefore you saw the sell off..
well it is time for that is it not? ie they are saying oh please judge let us waste more of the courts time, vrng's money etc etc...we can't have you end it now..lol
idiots
sounds very 'panicky' to me and certainly doesn't address the direct issues of the responsibility of maintaining files when served with a notice of infringement as per case law.
expected they would try and defend, pps tells us mkt doesn't care and won\t until JJ makes a decision.
nice to see them scared of going to jail though :)
Oh of course, they are just trying to make their own theivery legal and others attacking them for it illegal/difficult lol
do no evil - ya right
almost seems like not only did Furrow corner google, he cornered a very reluctant judge given what you laid out there snoop (thx)...
interesting
excellent post by carlmul on ST - diligence on spoilation
http://www.flhlaw.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Hackman%20Article%20%2801325419%29.PDF
again, not quite sure how/why short volume just keeps increasing when you read this other than its google shorting in spite as it knows its in a corner now....
after you read this pdf its pretty obvious google is cooked
52% short volume today
51% friday
pps hasn't moved, wouldn't wanna be short when those numbers are showing up and the price isn't going down! lol
ouch, averaging over 46% last 11 trading days
that can't be good for our short friends...someone big is accumulating...that's for sure
http://www.shortanalytics.com/getshortchart.php?tsymbol=vrng
And don't forget ever SINCE that information came out, the short interest / short daily volume has actually been INCREASING LOL!!
when its absurd, there is a reason...
LOL...thanks...as I said maybe share this with the dude who didn't believe me about manipulation
Given his propensity to favor the loser here, I can't argue your logic and will make no predictions as predictions illicit too much spite and vitreol on here.
I will say however, I will be interested to see how he can ignore google's own employee and expert witness's testimony.
I do find one thing interesting given the so called attempt for more transparency in the public markets.
The idea of shorting, while not new, is much more relevant today given the proliferation of hedge funds, day traders, many more market participants in today's 24/7 global trading environment.
Personally, what I'd like the SEC to do, is institute short reporting requirements.
While hedge funds don't like transparency, a lack of it leads to manipulation and potential market distortions.
Imagine if the market could have seen Goldman deciding it was taking a big short position in the mbs market when it was trying to sell the junk to others? Clearly it would solve alot of problems wouldn't it.
If I go on to bloomberg, i can see a great deal of information on who owns a stock at any given moment (to a very granular level).
Perhaps its time the SEC forces those shorting to reveal who they are. While it may change some views on a stock (ie followers to decide ok we'll short too) at a minimum it allows transparency.
I would like to see that and given shorting is a big part of the market now, we arguably should have that info.
Especially when they are technically borrowing my and your stock to do so.
believe what you please friend...I know what happens on the street you do not
As you said
1. What is the relevant benchmark?
2. What is your source of out-performance stats?
3. What is your time period?
4. Are you using any risk adjusted metrics?
5. What do statistics say about the % that SHOULD / CAN outperform (based on above) vs. the % that is outperforming?
6. Are you using data during a bull or bear market, and how do those influence results?
7. Are your stats addressing survivorship bias?
I am sure you know the answers to all those from the stats you googled from wiki - and those are the 'easy' questions
goodnight..
The asus letter is informing the market they are undertaking a new process. yes it was needed
many do...look at the stats and certainly more than statistics suggest should
not to mention i am quite comfortable with my view given my experience, and knowledge.
its nice to believe it doesn't exist but it does
Moyer, I get your frustration but its not really "news" per se...it's simply court and legal process. Positive hopefully for longs yes, as I have stated my views on it.
But, simply announcing it to the markets makes the team look like they are pumping their stock as there is nothing concrete/positive to report here.
Ie its not Material to the company "yet" so until it is, what they are doing is indeed correct and professional.
Disagree a PR was needed here.
I have a few responses to that.
1. If you look at finance theory friend, the majority of participants (Efficient Market Hypothesis) cannot beat the market over time.
2. Yet many hedge funds outperform correct?
3. Well EMH suggests all people have access to the same info and act rationally on that info.
4. If number 3 doesn't hold (access to info) EMH goes out the door and you can beat the market over time.
5. I then ask, how do you think so many hedge funds outperform over time? LOL
6. Easy answer, they all trade inside info and I know this as a fact, I have many friends in the fund management business, primarily long only funds and it drives them mad. Why? because they stick to their values and ethics, problem is its a scale business so if they are competing for the same mandate, well they guy who shows better returns typically wins and therefore adds more AUM right (so more money for him as a result).
Its a rigged game friend..this is nothing new
yup...that will tell us everything, if that happens prior to news on google...well...proof is in the puddin as they say!
Let's think about what you just said for a second, and while I 100% agree that's the 'rational view' let's look at it from Google's perspective.
1. Google steals technology, we know that, so firstly are they scared of breaking the law? Clearly not.
2. Google changed their business practices, obstructed justice, deleted evidence (all according to their own employee) and you believe the "do no evil" company does no evil? Lol.. the stated "do no evil" is a slight of hand, what better way to pretend you're not evil by using it as your company slogan! Clearly, they believe they are above the law.
3. Larry Page is a megalomaniac and a sociopath. Listen to him speak about Google's role in this world, his part in it, etc. He BELIEVES he is some sort of messiah, again, believes he can't do anything wrong and that laws should be written to allow him to do what he wants to advance society.
4. This is a penny stock with 15% institutional ownership, think anyone, including the sec cares? nope, and hard to prove as well.
5. Any sane hedge fund looks at the risk here and does not short. Look at how PRKR moved on LESS news, further behind in the legal process, less money coming to them, no portfolio, not the same mgmt team, yet our short volume increased and has not moved even with de-risking. The risk for a short here is immense, a smart hedge fund would cover.
6. Why are shorts not scared? I have been trying to figure this out since day 1, with every piece of info that has de-risked this position, why are they still there? Because clearly they fear very little, why fear very little? Because they will be told when to cover. Then you must ask, who can tell them when to cover?
7. What value does it bring to google? well alot
A. It punishes VRNG, and anyone seeking to come after them (even if they lose monetarily, its a deterrant to trolls, wins don't help your pps bc we're google and we'll fight).
B. It holds the pps down and forces VRNG (if ever required) do to a secondary at lower prices (again if required down the road) - punitive.
c. EGO - which is all this is about and the destruction of evidence tells us that.
8. They are not scared of any laws, hell they work with the NSA and CIA you think they don't do what they want?
Lots of rational reasons...
well if google is behind the short position, what risk is there? they know when to cover right?
If the shorts begin acting rationally we should see a slow march up to the $3.50 - 3.75 range prior to Nov 7, just too much risk now.
That being said, should they continue to act irrationally we should ask, who else has been acting irrationally in this case?
Then ask ourselves does it seem probably that the 2 actors acting irrationally, are indeed only one?
I think this next few weeks tells us
:)
Slightly OT - Will be curious to see if the shorts jump on PRKR given they have simply had a jury ruling.
Certainly those of us in this stock no how long a process can go on and it provides perfect fodder for the FUD's and shorts.
yes that's fair to want the document, but I think at this point we can pretty much trust JJ Seabrook! lol
JJS provided the full text and to answer the question on ST. Iams in is incorrect.
Set Hearing as to [978] MOTION for Order to Show Cause UNDER RULE 37 FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH AUGUST 13, 2013 ORDER. Motion Hearing set for 11/7/2013 at 10:00 AM in Norfolk Courtroom 4 before District Judge Raymond A. Jackson. (ptom)
Iams is just looking at the motion by VRNG not this response by HJJ in which a hearing is now set.
meant to say shorts ARE pushing on a string.
51% short volume on Friday but pps went up :)
yes it worked but this is the original motion, not the response from HJJ.
was that intended?
Wow 51% short volume today but we were up....they are losing control.
Really hope big news happens soon, there will be a squeeze beyond PRKR...shorts are not pushing on a string...
Crazy that people would be pushing harder - perhaps its indeed google behind a fund and doing there best because they know they are up against a wall and a low pps is the only leverage they have to push vrng into a lower settlement, unlikely but it may be all they have left in their bag of tricks.
http://www.shortanalytics.com/getshortchart.php?tsymbol=vrng
I think we will and less of a 'hopium' comment. Why? well this is really the first time in this trial where I have seen (and perhaps correct me if i'm wrong) HJJ respond relatively effeciently to a very important motion.
I really think he finally has clued in to the fact that google has been gaming and has hung themselves.
While, as our JJ has mentioned, we don't want to assume he will hammer them now with a ruling suggesting further analysis of a w/a is moot, this actually seems like it might be the case.
If he had a view based on the evidence provided, that google did not obstruct or it was somehow his 'fault' for not providing enough details he would simply rule on the motion.
Giving google the chance to 'give their side' is clearly what he his doing here but it implies, combined with the above, that he like any sane man, cannot ignore Bartholomew's testimony.
That issue, Bart's testimony is what tells me google is cooked and we may very well see a final ruling very soon absent a settlement. I believe this meeting is more about warning google, settle now or else.
There is ZERO reason to be selling here and i am buying more monday.
thanks...yes and clearly the perfect world scenario has not been the world we've lived in here...agree with being conservative in our hopes