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.
zitboy, re charts, pix (and sounds):
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=653523
bush -- much can, and some fair portion of that probably will, happen over the next 14 months
this year's proxy will include a proposal to increase authorized shares; probably to 300M (room for two 2:1 splits, including current options/etc., or for one such split plus a bit of M&A)
I agree that we are still some distance away from the first 2:1 split, fundamentally . . . but that should change before 6/04 (or at least I for one expect our fearless leaders to be planning as if it could)
buyout, schmuyout -- sheesh (eom)
Perfectly legal "collusion" (as is all legitimate business in one way or another . . .).
No, it wouldn't be "fraud". (eom)
OT: Dish -- yup; onomatopoeic even! (eom)
my3sons87 -- yup -- I'm thinking/hoping IDCC actually plans to get a higher rate on the phones with 3G (at least that's what I got from Howard's tone of voice when he addressed this point in the CC -- to me at least he really sounded like the fact that the S/E 2G license would not cover phones with 3G was something IDCC wanted) (we'll see . . .)
AMS -- yes (eom)
my3sons87 -- sorry, but not correct; the settlement PR and comments in the CC were point blank that phones including 3G are NOT covered by the S/E license
It is so richly ironic for a self-proclaimed born-again trader in IDCC to have made this post -- as if you are teaching the rest of us something re the market that is just too sublime for the rest of us to possibly grasp without your help; and further, apparently (not that it follows, as it doesn't), as if such subtle insight, once attained, should enlighten the rest of us as to how we should behave in re IDCC -- to wit, we should all follow your lead and behave just like you do; to be as clever and as right as you always are, we should all just sell out our long positions right now (because you have decided IDCC does not after all have the fundamentals and the potential upside you so recently were convinced it did), and then settle back and trade off IDCC's volatility, buying and selling as and when you deign to give us the signals from your charts. (Geez, why didn't we think of that? -- genius, sheer genius, no two lemmings, er, ways about it . . . !)
But, you assert, YOU of course NEVER trade WITH the lemmings, right? And for that matter, the fact that YOU are now ONLY trading IDCC would of course NEVER influence what you post here, or when, or the tone you take in your posts here, right?
Again, your inane hubris is most ironic, not to mention spectacularly arrogant and self-indulgent to boot -- just what this board needs, our very own "mini-dunce"; I wonder if dunce feels flattered, or threatened . . . ?
Give the rest of us a break already, smart guy . . . we don't need any more of your (or "house of cards" dunce's) self-annointedly superior knowledge or wisdom to enlighten us or to save us from ourselves. In fact, in your current posture, YOU are one of the very lemmings the article you posted slams, rather than any of the buy-and-hold LTCG IDCC longs here like myself.
OT: am2 -- fair enough; suppose I must indeed accept the word of such an accomplished Irish twit in re true Irish wit -- sorry I missed any sign of the latter
and thank you so much for your warm wish -- in return, let me say 'may the sun redden your nose and the clouds drench your clothes' (or however it is that wonderful wish goes over there)
loop -- I too hope IDCC moves very carefully, and in small steps -- Tantivy model, apparently(?) good (or at least not materially bad in the overall scheme of things); big stock or cash/stock acquisition, almost certainly bad -- not a damned thing wrong with IDCC just continuing as it is, just continuing to execute its existing business plan, given that IDCC apparently does not need to add anything via M&A to continue to be well and fully capable of moving forward with great success -- when IDCC gets to somewhere well north of $100/share, then what the hell; do a big acquisition, get bought out at a 20-30%+ premium, whatever -- but not until then, say I . . .
OT: you fell for iHub's April Fool's prank -- congrats!
teecee -- you (evidently!) are just SO determined to cram down the view and the expectation that QCOM will have to buy IDCC out, and real soon at that -- at a time WAY before IDCC has had any chance to reach full value; where any such near-term buyout ($50/share at the most, and more likely than not comfortably less than $40/share) would inherently mean that all current IDCC longs get ripped off of all of the considerable and well-nigh inevitable further upside of their shares in a continuingly independent IDCC (far beyond any such near-term buyout price, within at the most a year or two), and get in return either just cash, or more likely shares that have no such appreciation potential under any circumstance . . .
hmmm . . .
so what exactly is your reason for being so fascinated with this very particular and (from an IDCC long's perspective) idiotic fetish!? -- you are so utterly full of $hit with your analytical bias on this, even if you do have your facts straight re the indemnity -- what the !?ck is up with you on this, anyway?
time for you to tell the rest of us the whole story -- are you just being really stupid and short-sighted on this, or are you really grinding another axe altogether -- ?
I for one would like to know
(I truly do love ya, dude, but your repeated recent assertions, effectively that any near-term buyout could be a good thing for current IDCC longs with anything other than a very short-term perspective, are just utter freaking bull$hit)
and on the other hand they can then jump right on in and start lobbing a few 25k+ bombs into the mix just to liven things up a bit
institutions do not need to buy in blocks in order to accumulate very effectively in the face of chaotic selling such as we've seen yesterday and so far today
teecee -- re NOK -- like I said (eom)
(COMTEX) B: InterDigital Appoints Senior Director of Corporate Development
KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa., Apr 1, 2003 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- InterDigital
Communications Corporation (Nasdaq:IDCC), a leading architect, designer and
provider of wireless technology and product platforms, today announced that
Charlie Brogan has been named as Senior Director of Corporate Development.
In this newly created position, Mr. Brogan will lead the Company's strategic
mergers and acquisitions activities. He will be responsible for coordinating the
identification, evaluation and execution of acquisition opportunities that
complement or extend InterDigital's technology and product offerings.
"I am pleased to appoint Charlie Brogan to the position of Senior Director of
Corporate Development," said Rich Fagan, Chief Financial Officer of
InterDigital. "With more than twenty years of senior level mergers and
acquisitions experience, Charlie will lead InterDigital's corporate development
activities at a time of positive momentum for the Company. By creating this
position, the Company is accelerating its growth possibilities, enhancing its
ability to penetrate new markets, providing InterDigital with access to a
broader range of technologies and products to offer to its customers, and
strengthening the Company's ability to increase shareholder value."
Mr. Brogan joined InterDigital in 2000 as Director of Business Analysis. He was
appointed to Senior Director of Business Analysis in 2001. In this role he has
been responsible for managing numerous aspects of the Company's financial
operations and contributing to business development activities.
Prior to joining the Company, he served for seventeen years as Principal and
President of Brandywine Capital, Ltd., an investment banking consulting firm
based in Wilmington, Delaware. Mr. Brogan's experience also includes tenure as
Chief Financial Officer of AmeriGas, an industrial gas/welding supply company,
and as a partner in a leverage buyout group.
Mr. Brogan earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemical Engineering from
Manhattan College and a Master's Degree in Business Administration from the
University of Delaware. He is a Certified Public Accountant and member of the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants as well as the State CPA
societies of Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Mr. Brogan also serves on the Investment Advisory Board for Ulster Project
Delaware.
About InterDigital
InterDigital architects, designs and provides advanced wireless technologies and
products that drive voice and data communications. The Company offers technology
and product solutions for mainstream wireless applications that deliver cost and
time-to-market advantages for its customers.
InterDigital has a strong portfolio of patented technologies covering 2G, 2.5G
and 3G standards, which it licenses worldwide. For more information, please
visit InterDigital's web site: www.interdigital.com. InterDigital is a
registered trademark of InterDigital Communications Corporation.
CONTACT: InterDigital Communications Corporation
Media Contact:
Dawn Goldstein, 610/878-7800
e-mail: dawn.goldstein@interdigital.com
or
Investor Contact:
Janet Point, 610/878-7800
e-mail: janet.point@interdigital.com
Copyright (C) 2003 Business Wire. All rights reserved.
-0-
SOURCE:
InterDigital
Communications
Corporation
*** end of story ***
M6 -- for the standards NOT covered by the ERICY/SE licenses, principally/in particular the 3G standards (just as we still need 3G licenses w/ ERICY/SE) -- indeed, a 3G license w/ ERICY/SE would do the trick
re 'hundreds of thousands of American jobs' -- what complete and utter crap! -- and just where are QCOM's chips made!? and just where are most other components of CDMA phones made!? and just where are most CDMA phones assembled!? not in this country, that's for *&^% sure -- probably overall not that much different than is the case with any other kind of cell phone (yeah, yeah, I know, screw MOT)
I absolutely have no general problem with QCOM, but in this particular instance -- give us all &^%6ing break already . . .
glenny -- it only works for something that is already on the web (I do not have my own web page, so I can't host something you've got on your own box) -- I was just trying to recall just what you do to copy the url once you find what you want on the web -- you right-click on what you want once you've found it on the web, and from there you copy the image's url so you can paste it in here per my previous post
if you want to paste in something you've got on your own box, first you have to get it onto the web
mcw -- wow, that's one to "Keep"
just don't be selling any too soon, now . . .
please consider your wonderful best wishes returned to you, as I'm sure they are by all here
currently available authorized and unissued shares are only adequate for a 3:2 split -- the shareholders must approve an increase in the authorized shares, beyond the current 100 million, before any split of 2:1 or greater can occur
I will be shocked if a proposal to that effect is not included in the upcoming proxy
OT: am2saggy, re 'comma required': prove it, liar -- cite me one acknowledged authority on modern English usage which directly confirms your preposterous assertion that, as a mandatory matter of proper English, the wording "two 2:1 splits" actually affirmatively and unambiguously means a single 2:1 split unless it's presented as "two, 2:1 splits" -- what utterly transparent nonsense; yet another lie
re 'how many shares did you sell on the 1999 run up': as I've told you more than once, and very recently at that, I've never sold any IDCC -- apparently you are having a serious problem with your memory as well as with plain English (not to mention with both telling, and acknowledging, the truth):
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=865606
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=865809
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=869376
and re my 'investment savy'[sic]: is the value of your investments, net of any margin and also net of any additional capital you may have put into your investments since mid-'97, currently more than nine times what it was in mid-'97? -- that's where I am on my end, respectively -- I think that's pretty good, all things considered; you've done as well or better?
one thing I will never do is fail to defend myself against your malicious and defamatory lies, you sorry mis-representative of the Irish (who are not a "race", by the way, you wannabe know-it-all -- my comment to you back then had absolutely nothing to do with your ethnicity, but instead had everything and solely to do with the fact that you act as you do on these boards, that you were behaving as badly back then as you continue to do now) (for your information, I am part Irish)
TO ALL THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THIS GREAT BOARD: I truly regret needing to make a post like this one, but I will not allow repeated shameless lies attacking my honesty and integrity to go unanswered -- of course, if you put am2saggy on ignore (a luxury I do not have, as I know that he is posting such lies, and that his posts containing such lies are being allowed to remain on this board), and if you then also put replies to him on ignore, you will not be bothered with my posts to him in response (and to those of you not able to use ignore, again, my sincere regrets, but please understand that I simply will not allow the lies in his repeated personal attacks on me to go unanswered) -- my thanks to all of you for your understanding
am2saggy -- no comma required; you lied (eom)
am2saggy -- once again, you lie:
"actually, after two 2:1 splits, I'll have 300,600 shares at an average cost right about $2/share even -- and I'm not the one who's gonna miss this runup, as I am not selling
try again" [emphasis added]
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=869025
OT: texb -- OK, I'll fess up -- the original text of my response was a goof -- happy now?
texb -- see next post by teecee (eom)
Re "last mile" -- new development to watch:
(COMTEX) B: XEROX: Xerox researchers develop breakthrough technology to bring benefits of
fiber optics to small businesses, homes available for licensing, innovation expected to drive down cost to extend fiber optic reach
Rochester, N.Y, Mar 26, 2003 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- Although the
information superhighway is here, the "off-ramps" are more like one-lane dirt
roads because of the high cost of routing fiber optic networks that last mile.
However, a new technology from Xerox Corporation (NYSE: XRX) could help change
that, by assisting the effort to bring affordable, high-capacity fiber optics
directly to businesses and even homes for the first time.
The technology breaks the bandwidth barrier that exists today by integrating an
Optical MEMS (Micro Electro-Mechanical Systems) photonic switch with planar
light circuits on a single silicon chip small enough to fit on a fingertip - a
first ever achievement.
The new switch promises to provide rapid delivery of optical services by
providing the functionality of a Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer
(R-OADM), a routing device that's commonly used today but is 10 to 100 times as
large and costly.
"Optical networks based on our technology could go way beyond delivering
on-demand DVD-quality videos in homes," said Joel Kubby, a technical manager at
Xerox's Wilson Center for Research and Technology in Webster, N.Y. "Our switch
could help usher in a new era of undreamed-of Internet applications, changing
the way we do business, seek information and find entertainment."
Advantages Today's optical networking equipment must switch from the optical to
the electronic domain. Xerox's technology enables switching in the all-optical
domain. Because it controls the flow of light rather than the flow of electrons,
it is ultimately faster, smaller and cheaper.
"With the Xerox switch, an entire R-OADM can be compressed into 2 cm x 1.5 cm in
size, and can direct enormous amounts of data in ways that currently require
large racks of assembled equipment," Kubby said. "Our technology would let
telecommunications companies install systems locally and even on utility poles."
"Waveguides" are very small conductors of light, about 5 to 6 microns or 1/10
the thickness of a human hair. The Xerox MEMS waveguide shuttle acts like a
miniature train track switch for the fine waveguides, avoiding the problems of
earlier, mirror-based MEMS switches.
The MEMS switches and waveguides are made together on a single crystal silicon
wafer using widely available semiconductor processing equipment. Such on-chip
integration avoids the complex alignment issues associated with manually
connecting different and larger components with optical fibers, and avoids the
cost and space associated with manufacturing, assembling and packaging the
separate components of Add/Drop Multiplexers.
In addition, the new technology eliminates the need for technicians to make
routing changes in the field, ultimately bringing bandwidth to consumers faster.
Kubby created a working prototype 8-channel reconfigurable OADM. Xerox intends
to commercialize this technology through licensing to leading companies in the
optical switching market.
"Global consumption of OADMs was $101 million in 2001 and will surge to $1.03
billion in 2006," according to Jeff D.
Montgomery, chairman and founder of market research firm ElectroniCast Corp.
"The most rapid growth is expected in fully reconfigurable devices."
Xerox MEMS Heritage The new optical switch technology builds on a broadly
enabling MEMS fabrication platform developed under a grant provided by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology in its Advanced Technology
Program. Xerox is the lead partner in the Optical MEMS Manufacturing Consortium,
and Kubby is the principal investigator for the consortium's project. Other
partners include Palo Alto Research Center, a subsidiary of Xerox; Corning
IntelliSense, a MEMS foundry and software company; Microscan, a data acquisition
firm; and Coventor, a MEMS software company. They are tasked with developing a
manufacturing process for Optical MEMS, which can be used broadly.
"Taking advantage of our MEMS knowledge to create breakthrough technology for
telecommunications and other industries is an outgrowth of our core MEMS
research for internal Xerox applications in digital printing," said Kubby.
At Xerox, Kubby and his team began conducting MEMS research in 1993, Optical
MEMS in 1998. Using Optical MEMS, Xerox is working to improve color image
quality during the color reproduction process. Optical MEMS devices could
eventually eliminate the need for high-cost precision manufacturing of
components that stabilize movement in Xerox photoreceptor belts.
Xerox Corporation, one of the world's top technology innovators, spends about $1
billion annually on research and development. It operates research and
technology centers in the United States, Canada and Europe that conduct work in
color science, computing, digital imaging, work practices, electromechanical
systems, novel materials and other disciplines connected to Xerox's expertise in
printing and document management. Xerox consistently builds its inventions into
business by embedding them in superior Xerox products and solutions, using them
as the foundation of new businesses, or licensing or selling them to other
entities. For more information, visit www.xerox.com/innovation.
Xerox innovation is expected to help telecommunications companies go "the last
mile" of their fiber optic networks, with a new Optical MEMS switch. Joel Kubby
and Kris German, two of the Xerox researchers responsible for developing the new
chip technology, examine the super-small "waveguide" patterns made by the new
switch. (Photo by: John Griebsch) Larger View (JPG, 6.5 MB) Back to Top
Xerox: The Document Company
1999-2003 XEROX CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
CONTACT: Tony Paine, Xerox Innovation Business Development Tel: +1 905 823 7091
x 336 e-mail: tony.paine@crt.xerox.com Bill McKee, Xerox Corporation USA Tel: +1
585 423 4476 e-mail: Bill.Mckee@usa.xerox.com Karen Arena, Karen Arena Media
Relations for Xerox USA Tel: +1 732 656 7861 e-mail: arenak@aol.com
M2 Communications Ltd disclaims all liability for information provided within M2
PressWIRE. Data supplied by named party/parties. Further information on M2
PressWIRE can be obtained at http://www.presswire.net on the world wide web.
Inquiries to info@m2.com.
(C)1994-2003 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD
-0-
*** end of story ***
wilco 24 -- shorts are not a unitary force, but instead are respectively as diverse as are the longs; they do not all act in unison or at the same time or with the same objective -- as the share price rises, some who are already short may cover, but others may add to their short positions and other shorts may initiate new short positions -- just as when the price falls, some longs sell, while others add to their long positions or initiate new long positions -- in general, it makes sense that as a stock rises to new highs, the short interest in that stock will tend to increase
re "squeeze" -- if the share price of a stock with a significant pre-existing short interest rises rapidly, those "old" shorts get deeper and deeper in the hole, and come under increasing pressure, including potential margin calls, to cover their short positions -- this can add additional buying pressure, thus amplifying the upward pressure on the already-rising share price
mschere -- CHECKS!? -- you're kidding, right!? -- I cannot believe that such payments are done any other way than by wire transfer, instantly verified on both ends . . . !!
Shoes -- I'll defer to Alley and GE_Jim and our other TA experts on this one
teecee -- guess I just want to be sure nobody here can think that by not responding I might be acknowledging even an iota of truth in what he's been saying
to assert as he has been doing that I have lied re my IDCC holdings and transactions is to directly attack my honesty and integrity -- I tend to take that VERY personally
Shoes1954 -- so far just four 10k blocks (eom)
am2saggy -- I've never sold even a single share of IDCC, and I have never sold shares of anything in order to meet a margin call -- I do use margin, and at times I have done so aggressively (although my margin posture now is considerably more conservative); on two occasions in the last 3 years I did have margin calls, which I met entirely with cash, as I knew ahead of time I would be able to do; and thanks in significant part to my use of margin, my current net account equity (after backing out what I put in to cover the margin calls, and also after having from time to time pulled out not insignificant amounts to take care of taxes, certain purchases, and whatever) is more than 9 times what it was when I first began seriously focusing on investing back in mid-97 -- this is the truth, these are the facts, whether you assert otherwise or not -- if your source claims to know otherwise, or to have ever heard otherwise from me, your source is lying
your continued repetition of your utter nonsense contrary to the foregoing -- especially (1) where you have been repeatedly advised that it is false, and (2) where you have failed to respond to my reasonable and good faith request to privately let me know just who was your alleged source for this falsehood (so that I might have the opportunity to correct this nonsense at its source, if indeed there was a source other than you), and (3) where you continue to assert this falsehood as truth, to the point of calling ME the liar for disputing it(!) -- constitutes nothing less than the knowing and deliberate spreading of a lie, and an intentional and deliberate attempt to defame me in front of the membership of this board
I trust the other members of this board see your effort in this respect for what it is, and see you for what you are in continuing to pursue it
because this isn't '99; this is not a speculative runup -- current price is still well below current true value, and utterly foreseeable further developments will push that true value to levels higher than it is today, and higher than the peak last time
actually, after two 2:1 splits, I'll have 300,600 shares at an average cost right about $2/share even -- and I'm not the one who's gonna miss this runup, as I am not selling
try again
"who am I to say that I have superior knowledge and know better"
nah, that's not your style, you'd never act like that