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.
GE, agree that $28 is likely light, too.
But I wonder how many posters here would sell if IDCC popped to $28 on Monday WITHOUT buyout news---Lots, I would guess.
I think it would be interesting to see if there would be a bidding war for IDCC--maybe it could go for $40 per share and at that price I don't think the buyers would have any problem getting a sufficient number of shares tendered.
(Maybe not Mickey's though!)
No, Mickey, haven't had a share of IDCC since 1999-2000, but I've had quite an education watching this company and reading the longtime posters here.
Psst, I'd bail so fast at $40 your head would spin off your neck if I had shares in the mid-$20s
robj
Mickey, you did see that of Heartland's 2009 portfolio somebody posted earlier on this board that IDCC was their top loser and only one of two losers the company had in that short posting. How much opportunity cost did Heartland have by sitting on an 18% loss in 2009 in IDCC?--I expect there was lots of money they could have made by using their IDCC stake someplace else in 2009.
I think Mr. N. has lost confidence in management and is not expecting IDCC to make the gains he has been hoping in 2010 and the future--another example of those lowered expectations is T.C. going to $33--a number not that far above a $28 buyout that I think could be the offer.
I'm just saying Mickey, since you wear your heart on your sleeve, be prepared for a buyout offer way below the $82-$300 I've seen you post tonight.
robj
right now, Mickey I think Nago hates the way this company is going enought that he might vote in favor of $28--a 40% premium over current share price and no more litigation risks for Heartland--they can add up the court victories versus the losses in court that IDCC has sustained.
Old dog, if the price is $18.50 at the bid, that's public knowledge and I don't see what's to keep IDCC from buying in the open market--especially if it is the company's intent to shore up the falling stock price.
I think it's very revealing of management's intent to take the company private at the expense of longterm shareholders that they were not buying back below $20.
No insider information would have been necessary to buy below $20--just a concern for shareholders.
robj
GE Jim,
Good analysis on going private.
I'm convinced it wouldn't be that hard at $28--especially with all the call buyers I see on this board who would get a $5 in the money on a $23 call.
Cash in the bank is part of what they would be buying and right now the management seems NOT to be spending much of it to increase shareholder value--ergo increase what they would have to pay to go private. Keep the cash and pay only dollar for dollar for it and discount the earnings going forward by not trying to sign any big boys right now.
T.C. and those in the know who say that going private is what is happening have a better idea than I do, but if the new buyers wanted to get IDCC at the cheapest price possible they are sure as hell doing everything they can to keep the price down.
If management isn't going to make a tender offer, why wouldn't they be buying back shares below $20--too much bullshit about insider knowledge and blackout dates doesn't fly to me.
good call GE
robj
Loop, I don't think I agree with you about the difficulties of going private.
1. Heartland is down 18%+ on IDCC this year with 7%+ of the shares--I'm sure any other institution is down similar if not more.
2. Expect management would structure the proxy vote to allow them to vote their options (or worse case to excercise the options prior to voting)--and all those not voting for one reason or another would be "abstain" votes and would not count against the 50% majority either--making the yes votes that much more powerful
3. Add in IDCCers in below $20 average or with $23 call options that would go $5 into the money and how many of those would take $28 in a buyout if the proffer was made on Monday?
I'm wondering if you aren't at about 50% with the above considerations.
robj
Mickey, good call on building houses--and selling them, too.
Wife and I had quite a number of rental houses, but while we both were teaching school full time and with always a pocket full of chores on the houses at the end of each work day, we sold out over a couple of years finishing up in summer of 2007 when people were paying stupid money for every house out there and getting financing with ease, too. In summer of 2006 I saw how every appraisal was coming in $1000-$1500 over the sell price and knew something wasn't right (not smart enough to use the term, "bubble" then) but we put everything except our own house on the market and had all but two closed within a year. Those other two we have on Contracts for Deed and are sold to families we have known for many years.
I hope IDCC works for you and so do your houses.
robj
Mickey, what other stocks do you own besides IDCC. I'd be interested if you've done as much D.D. on anything else and have bought it. Thanks, robj
okay dclarke, I hope you're right taht everybody lines up and pays and pays.
I'm saying for all their declining market share Nokia is still a bellweather and if they can get away without paying, why wouldn't somebody else try it too.
Also, I've never heard a good explanation from a long here on why Kyocera appears to be late in their renewal?
Explanations?
I think the problem with projecting forward earnings for 12 mos. is that one can't take into account the number of licensees that might decide to follow in Nokia's footsteps and not pay for using at least those 4 patents or maybe like Kyocera who's late in renewal, maybe several others balk at renewals as well. There is nothing IDCC can do except to sue them and that's worked out so well.
How can you assign a P/E on that basis?
Uh, not $.14 buyout ferchrissake. How about $1.40?
tired of waiting and sold enough at $.43 to have only free share now. Bring on he $.140 buyout
Yesterday's conference call would have been an awfully good opportunity to pre-release good earnings news. Anybody concerned that company will miss?
Which licensee will be the first to test the waters and not pay?
Samsung maybe accordeing to that article posted earlier today on this board. Pantech--they might feel they got in just in time for a bad deal. Anybody want to guess?
Notice the 8K filing makes no mention of the validity claims IDCC made in its PR last night. Only that there was no infringement. Don't know if it means anything or not besides not wanting to put your spin on an SEC document
no Danny, I didn't suggest you were Fudmeister. You got on to me a week or so ago about something that's now way under the bridge. Please don't collect me on your shit list for something I didn't say or do this time, eh?
robj
Absolute, Loop.
Before Nokia is forced to pay if ever, the case has to go through IDCCs appeal to the Appeals Court....and back to the ITC if IDCC wins their first court case ever. . .then we wait for the ITCs final ruling, which if it for the first time ever goes in IDCCs favor Nokia appeals back to the Appeals Court. timeline 3+ years?
How many options and bonus packages will management have taken by then while shareholders flounder?
I don't think Nokia needs to worry about appealing the validity. They will just keep not paying until some governing body rules the patents are valid. If the issues before the Appeals Court preclude a validity discussion, Nokia simply continues as before by not paying.
M3S, you quoted WM, ""In the ID, the ALJ found InterDigital’s patents valid and enforceable, but also determined that the patents were not infringed by Nokia’s 3G products."
WM is merely quoting from the ALJs initial determination, while Nokia is focused on language from the ITC.
Is Merritt trying to deliberately muddy the waters for investors by harkening back to the prior ALJ determination in favor of IDCCs validity without acknowledging what was said at the ITC?
If they allow questions, that would be a good one, "why Nokia and IDCC are so far apart on what was said in their PRs.
My own thought is that based on just the PRs, that Nokia was providing the most recent information.
Maybe Nokia really doesn't infringe?
What a concept and two ruling bodies have agreed with that concept.
I love Mickey to death, but I can't take his word for it, you know.
absolutely not related at all.
Just a number of small biotechs got a nudge today after that news came out.
Maybe only attention to the overall sector. . .except there was an inordinate volume on two days last week and today's price action was interesting. The close was no biggie, but the bid/ask mid-day was jumping around quite a bit.
I asked Rain what news there could possibly be to ever move this stock forward--I can't really think of anything.
Buyout at $1.25--I'm all in on that!
robj
Whizz
No final determination (vs. initial determination I.D.) ruling has been written and filed.
It is this final written product which will be a combination of the ALJs I.D. and the ITC commission's voice on the reviews that is still to be disseminated.
My question after reading your post is what language would be used to address the validity issue?
The ALJs I.D. about validity is not overturned but withdrawn, meaning it's like he didn't give an opinion.
Validity seems to me in limbo-land No longer officially valid by edict of the ALJ, but not ruled invalid by the ITC.
So what is the language going to be in the final report regarding validity. The releases by the two companies this evening give each of their respective positions.
okay, glenny, after reading whizzers good post, it seems that the ruling of vaildity the ALJ said in his initial determination (ID) will not be part of the final ruling when it's filed. It doesn't say what wording will take its place. Obviously Nokia is hoping and saying in the release something like the final ruling will say IDCCs patents are not valid--that would hugely suck and more. IDCC is hoping by ignoring the whole validity thing in Merritt's PR that the final ruling will not even use the word validity and that by assumption the patents remain valid unless successfully challenged at some future proceeding by Nokia or somebody else. (Nokia would be hamstrung in the Appeals Court this time if there's no mention of validity in the final report because there would be nothing to challenge) Merritt hopes the validity issue is back to square one and maybe nobody else will have the wherewithall to challenge it again.
What's the best guesses by those here on how the final ruling will read with regards to validity--it's obvious that IDCC will hate the phrasing of the infringement part of that ruling?
Good Question, Glenny.
What's Nokia's vehicle to get the validity issue decided?
Is it the appeals court? Doesn't make a lot of sense.
Is it an issue still unresolved in the current venue? Not if investigation is closed means all is closed.
Nokia has a great ruling in hand, but they might still need a quarter for a cup of coffee
Like Merritt and Nokia are reading two separate decisions:
Nokia's View:
New York, NY, United States - Nokia announced today that the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has reviewed the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) Initial Determination in favor of Nokia, in the action brought by InterDigital. Following the review, the Commission has affirmed the ALJ's Initial Determination and terminated the investigation.
Nokia is delighted with this outcome. Not only did the Commission conclude that Nokia products do not infringe InterDigital's patents, but it also withdrew the portion of the ALJ's Initial Determination that had found the patents valid.
The case, filed by InterDigital, alleged that Nokia infringed four patents that InterDigital asserted as essential for the UMTS (3G) mobile standard. Today's result is consistent with a previous judgement in the United Kingdom that found several InterDigital patents not to be essential to the UMTS mobile standard.
From IDCC:
KING OF PRUSSIA, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--InterDigital, Inc. (NASDAQ:IDCC - News) today announced that, in the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) investigation initiated by InterDigital against Nokia, the Commission issued a notice that it reviewed in part the Initial Determination (ID) by the Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and found no violation of Section 337 and has terminated the investigation. In the ID, the ALJ found InterDigital’s patents valid and enforceable, but also determined that the patents were not infringed by Nokia’s 3G products.
I think in the last sentence Merritt is trying to leave the impression that the ALJs decision that patents were valid still stands. That is absolutely not the case, and I wonder why he's being this devious.
robj
PS People think I'm a basher sometimes, it's just that I'd once like to see the company win in court one time, ever. EVER! How many court decisions can they lose before their licensing efforts with the minnows suffers?
JohnSamuel, When I read Merritt's quotes from the IDCC release, I didn't see him mention the validity issue--which is the dagger in IDCCs heart right now. Nokia obviously played this up big in what you posted.
Is Merritt just pretending the ruling didn't say this or is he trying to bury it?
exactly right dmiller.
The ALJs determination that patents are valid is now like he never said it.
Mickey, IDCC is indeed worse off.
The 4 patents they tried to hogtie Nokia with (and would have to assume their best patents) might be found invalid.
Well at least if that happens IDCC can swing for the fences at the Appeals Court, because they'll need positive rulings in both their infringement appeal and nowmight get to add a defense of the validity. Wonder when that decision will be made public. Thoughts?
How many here are going to be making new bets on how IDCC fares in court this time?
obviously not knowledgeable enough--I thought along with you and a bunch of others that with all the patents IDCC was presenting, there would be a ruling of infringement on at least one of them. Anyone who says now that they didn't expect infringement is re-writing history
That it didn't happen is troublesome, because maybe the patents are not as strong or essential (remember engine and transmission bullshit for years). Now there is a question in the air about even the 4 patents validity.
I hope the earnings are great when the come out, because this company can't afford a miss or even a hint of a miss of the whisper number right now.
I didn't read anything in Merrits quotes about the validity issue--maybe those of us who think that's of question right now are wrong. But a lot of posters seem to think a validity ruling is at question before the Appeals Court
how many times can one company step on its dick in a courtroom?
Only thing being reviewed of consequence is whether IDCCs four patents are valid--that's like a deathknell if they lose that issue in the appeals court.
This ruling does nothing but put the company back on the defensive.
Dammit, Mickey, I thought you had a better chance this time, man
robj
This might explain the volume and push today:
here is the article if full - it has been moved -
Production of H1n1 Vaccine for Coming Weeks Is Delayed, CDC Says
Share | Email | Print | A A A
By Bruce Rule
Oct. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Swine flu vaccine production has been delayed, so monthly estimates won’t be met, Anne Schuchat, head of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said on a conference call today.
She did not give a reason for the delay.
Rain, what do you make of the volume during a couple of days this week? Not so much price appreciation when you look at only the closes, but most shares are being traded at the ask lately.
Even being an ownedr, I don't know what the catalyst would be to drive this stock to even the $.60s
robj
Perry's assistant was named Della, Della Street
Re: IDCC
Any chance they would choose just to review Nokia's validity claims and accept the staff and ALJ position with respect to IDCCs infringement Claim?
That would be worse than just a blanker "No Review" at all.
Surely that's not in the realm of possibilities, is it?
Maybe it's finally given up the ghost. Or now that Cardona has taken all our assets to Dreamcatcher(?) he doesn't need ADZR anymore. Anyway I was just checking to see if his legal entanglements have left CC living out of a cardboard box, yet. Hope so.
maybe dmiller, but I neither welcome nor will I honor the confidentiality of private messages I don't solicit. Nor will I run for another term as your president
dmiller, I'll answer for Mickey--he's absolutely been around at least as long as you and did disappear for quite a while after taking a monster bath with this company.
I don't own shares right now, but I live through Mickey's shares and wish him the greatest possible returns with this damn stock.
robj
I think I'd just save all that lease money and buy a pick and shovel and concentrate on picking up the gold and diamonds that likely litter the top of AENPs claim.
Are we not soon to come upon some recs by Piper about strategic planning. The only one I'm interested in is an outright sale of this company, ferchrissake a buck looks like the Eldorado Gold mine right now.
Rainmaker, am I reading this right?
$60 Million in debt? Who do they owe this to?
Ferchrissake, if that's accurate number, no wonder we're sitting at $.40
Wonder what a person thinks will happen to make it go up?
I can't think of anything. Rainmaker?
I don't know nessco, what are you posting that's rocking the world, dude?
I was just looking at that insider site after somebody posted on another stock about a purchase from thursday, and it was posted at the site one day later.
so I just looked up other stocks that I follow and IDCC was the only one I saw that was ALL sales---don't know jack about options, but I do know that I've read many complaints here about management NOT buying with their own money. This site absolutely confirms those complaints so I posted it.
get over yourself nessco and others who think I'm bashing-which I would never do with IDCC and good people on this board that I remember from nearly 10 years ago--Why would anybody want to bash Mickey's stock ferchrissake. It'd be like stomping on a bunny rabbit.