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.
Your answer mirrors my view of things also. It's a sordid mess and I'm deeply disappointed that our government doesn't have enough patriots in it to address this thing directly and decisively. Along with the losses of the rank and file employees of Bear, that's the thing that saddens me the most.... I guess it just a reflection of the age.
In any case, I hope your bet on IDCC bears you much fruit. Good luck Jim.
Exactly, NOK hand picked IDCC's "essential" patents and lost. I would think that essentiality would be harder to prove than validity. The UK court did not rule on validity but as I say, I would think that if IDCC had ANY valid patents out of the thousands that had been approved by the USPTO, those would be the ones IDCC would bring before the ITC. (avoiding the ones that NOK could challenge due to vagaries of their TDD license w/IDCC, of course)
True. I'm still curious whether someone can answer my question though. It may be that the lack of an answer, is the answer.
Loop, I think you posted this fact before but since the patents in this case were hand picked by IDCC, one might think that IDCC choose ones that had the greatest chance of successfully bearing scrutiny.
felix7, I did read today that was not enough funds in the deal for the BOD to get any of their options. They went empty handed, according to the article. If I can find the article, I will post it later.
jangis, That might be the answer and of course, normally it would be. However, Bear Stearns is not an ordinary trader as they are also the bank that underwrites much of the stock trading activity that goes on. I might be wrong but as I have been reading about this financial mess, it seems that Bear Stearns could potentially be backing up their own trades. In a situation like which occurred last week where there was a run to pull out funds, Bear Stearns might possibly not have enough money, even if they sold all the stock they had, to cover all of their debts and obligations. If this is not possible, how is it that Bear Stearns got sold to JP Morgan for less than the worth of the building they own as their corporate headquarters? That's total, including all of their other assets!
Is it possible in a bankruptcy situation, that because of a shortage of funds, the shorted stock never gets covered?
revlis, thanks to you and dclarke. That goes a long way in answering a question I've had for some time.
paheka, why would a investment bank like Lehman pick up another bankrupt firm's liability unless it was part of a restructuring? If it was part of a restructuring, I would think that the primary debt holders, those that held some sort of collateral, would be paid first and there may be no remaining equity to make good on the borrowed shares that had been short sold.
I'm thinking that this is one of the issues that is most worrisome about the potential unwinding of the financial markets. I also was wondering if it is a small factor in the high level of shorting that has been going on. For example, if a firm was sort of strapped, they may delay covering short positions as one of the many moves to keep themselves financially liquid. Likewise, as crazy as it might seem, perhaps a firm might also, as one of many money generating moves, look for what could be good short candidates and go a little heavier than normal on the short side. Each of these scenarios, whether possible or not, would increase the risk to the strength of the company whose shares were sold short.
The DOW is storming back. Hopefully the others will follow suit.
Wm3s, while my question would also cover naked shorts, I was more interested in the shorting of borrowed shares as I would expect that Bear Stearns, for example, would short borrowed shares as part of a hedge strategy. The source of my question was the result of musing about what would have happened if the FED and JP Morgan had not stepped in and what effect it could have on other stocks, especially those heavily shorted.
Has anyone got a copy of the transcript of that conference call?
Hypothetical question: If a hedge fund, such as Bear Stearns went bankrupt, did not get bailed out like Bear Stearns did, and had stock that the firm had a short position in, who would buy back the short shares to replace those that were sold? I understand that there would be a debt to be repaid but who would be the primary debt holders and is there any guarantee that the shorted shares would be re bought?
IDCC does not seem to be showing the weakness it has in the past months right now. On other days, with the major indices dropping like they did, IDCC would have fallen dramatically; unlike today.
The DOW plunged about 300 points in just over a half hour. It's back up quieT a bit but WOW!
lastchoice, do you know of another manufacturer that has the 7.2 downlink capabilities presently for sale? TIA
A repost from AB's and my response. Would anyone like to weigh in on this?
Orange First to Offer 3G HSDPA at 7.2 Mbps to Corporate Customers
By: Eneerg1 in IDCC | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 14 Mar 08 9:00 AM
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications Msg. 25292 of 25301
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #
Do you receive our FREE 3G Newsletter ? If not click here
14th March , 2008
Europe France : Orange announced the launch of 3G+ HSDPA for corporate customers in Lyon today. The offer dobles downlink speeds of up to 7.2 Mbps – the fastest on any mobile network. The launch enhances Orange's existing range of high speed mobile offers. Deployment in other major towns and cities across France should be underway by summer. Above shows the PC Express Card “Huawei E870 “ detailed below.
3G+ at 7.2 Mbps
Nowadays, 3G+ based on HSDPA (High Speed Downlink Packet Access) and HSUPA (High Speed Uplink Packet Access) are capable of downlink speeds of up to 7.2 Mbps compared to only 3.6 Mbps previously, and uplink speeds of up to 1.4 Mbps. With 3G+ HSDPA, professionals on the move can enjoy speeds that are up to 20 times faster than standard 3G. Downloading a 1 Mb file can now be done in only 2 seconds.
Orange, the leader of Mobile broadband
The launch restates Orange's position as leader of mobile broadband in France, with its wide coverage and superior speeds on offer.
The range of networks allows Orange to offer professionals on the move around France a continuous mobile broadband service with:
* 71% of the population with 3G+ coverage by the end of 2008
* 99% of the population with EDGE coverage
* 30,000 Orange WiFi hotspots
and more than 150 roaming deals(1) for use abroad.
Meeting the most demanding customer's needs with Business Everywhere
With Orange's Business Everywhere solutions, users can send and receive emails and attachments on the move, browse the Internet and use their company's applications, exchange files and presentations, watch video and look at photos, all as easily as they can when in the office.
Orange is the only operator to offer three types of mobile phone compatible with 3G+ (HSDPA at 7.2 Mbps and HSUPA) which can also be adapted to laptop computers:
* USB key « Huawei E270 »
* PCMCIA Card « Option GX 301 »
* PC Express Card “Huawei E870 “
These plug & play mobiles are ready to use and automatically install on PC and Mac laptop and desktop computers.
http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/March2008/5885.htm
My response:
Eneerg, any chance, in your opinion, that these phones and PCMIA card have IDCC inside? If my recollection is correct, Huawei has a license with IDCC. I don't know who makes the PCMIA card but, again if my recollection is correct, the IDCC modem card recently tested and licensed to a "major asian manufacturer" was the only one yet on the market that had the 7.2 Mbps downlink speed capabilities. Is that major asian manufacturer Huawei?
thanks DR.
Your right, that might be an option IDCC has.
Data Rox, there have been several here that have suggested that IDCC might hold the threat of a higher world-wide royalty rate from NOK/Sam if they do not sign before the conclusion if the ITC. I have wondered if that was really a viable option due to such an action possibly being challenged as non-FRAND. However, it does seem to me that if NOK/Sam/IDCC were to acquiesce to a US-only license, then IDCC would be open to demanding a much higher royalty rate, in part because previously concluded licenses with other manufacturers were for world-wide sales and would not provide any structure to base NOK/Sam's license off of.
If I'm correct in my theory, the higher, US-only license would probably make such an arrangement for NOK/Sam impractical.
Would you mind offering a response to that idea?
Desert dweller, at least the blow would be softened by the $6 per phone (If we got the same deal as Broadcom)
mschere, I seem to remember reading on this board a post that stated that the 31 "essential" patents challenged by NOK were all of the IDCC patents that were declared "essential" in the UK. There were other "essential" patents that were filed in other countries. Anyway, that was my understanding.
Using volume as an indicator it appears that we will continue to see the gains of Friday. At what point it causes the shorts to really start buying back in earnest will be interesting.
Volume and accumulation holding up very well this morning. We should do over 1/4 Million in first hour.
If I read things right, it could be a battle to remember too. The volume and price jump on Friday will definitely attract the attention of the momentum players who, over the weekend, will have an opportunity to study the issue. They will see the Wall Street Journal and CNBC blurbs and they will become aware of the nearness of a resolution of the ITC case and it's implications regarding a major stock price movement depending on the outcome. I would not be surprised whatsoever to see some more press coverage either since the two press items on Thursday will already have a good many Wall Street types watching the battle play out. If the shorts employ a strategy to suppress the resurgent price movement by shorting more, and they fail to hold it down, there could be a short squeeze, price explosion, IMO. There will be even more shorted shares that will have to be found to cover with and the shorts will be competing with all the others who will want to get in on the POP resulting both from the momentum and the potential for more rise if IDCC prevails. We've all been hoping for a massive short squeeze and hopefully, we are positioned to see it in the near future.
MTJBKH, I'm sure that IDCC has it covered in it's response to the domestic industry motion but besides what you have mentioned, the list of activities that IDCC has been involved in that would qualify as domestic industry is long, IMO. That list would include IDCC's efforts to develop the WLL (Wireless Local Loop) and the BCDMA technology. This technology was in fact licensed by Samsung for $35 million and had it been successful in it's maket acceptance, Samsung would have been a manufacturer utilizing the Ultraphone technology. See IDCC 8K:
http://www.secinfo.com/dsvRc.93v.htm
The list goes beyond that however and also includes IDCC's supplying of technology General Dynamics, the contract to help SK Telecom build out it's multi-mode communications network, the TDD development contract for NOK, etc... Would the Chinese have IDCC as a council member of the TD-SCDMA Forum if they did not have real technology? Not hardly! In fact it was because IDCC was recognized as as a pioneer of TDD technology.
See link: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/InterDigital+Elected+as+Council+Member+in+TD-SCDMA+Forum.-a081857577
IDCC appears to have a very capable legal team on this one and the Judge seems to be a very intelligent, straight shooter who "gets it". I'm comfortable that the debate on this item will end soon enough in IDCC's favor.
How do you do that? What basis would you use to have them investigate outside of your belief that something wasn't right?
Does anyone know of a route to have the possibility of naked shorting investigated? There is no reasonable explanation of the action today that I can see. Also, could the difference in the number of shares showing as traded on the Scottrade streamer and the quotes be any indication of naked shorting? Scottsteamer shows 2,144,207 shares traded today.
wilco, That is the only conclusion I can come up with. Much of the time this afternoon, there has been thousands of shares available at the ask as though the seller has had no regard for trying to get his best price for the stock. If definitely looks like the only purpose is to drive down the price. The only other explanation is that there is some institution that wants out bad and was responsible for helping plant todays story in the WSJ so that there were plenty of buyers for that which they were unloading.
yeah, I just looked up a quote on Scottrade for IDCC and it also showed about 950,000. The Scott streamer shows the higher number 1,800,000. Curious; but I guess it must be wrong since so many of the others have the lower number.
I just checked Stockcharts and it reflects what you are saying even though Scottrade is now up to 1,765,618 now. I guess we'll have to see what is reported at the end of the day.
Sinnet, Scottrade shows 1,753,716 and climbing right now. It may be wrong but that is what I'm basing my statement on.
jeffree, I'm curious as to whether a big buying push from IDCC would move the price up right now. Near 2 million shares will trade today. Traders may account for a lot of the activity but normally, I would have thought that this kind of buying pressure would have carried the price higher, even with the rest of the market down. However, we are just about where we started the day right now. Amazing!
Still, it would be a good place for IDCC to be buying; that is if they really are planning to complete the buyback. It may be that IDCC is playing it safe. Not to be negative, but they cannot be absolutely sure they will prevail in the ITC action at this point and if they don't, the company will need the money to keep itself strong while it continues its development of alternative technology and income streams
What's very telling to me is the volume today. At the current volume, the number of shares traded today will be close to the 2,100,000 shares that traded the day IDCC missed on earnings. That is a spectacular number of shares to trade and yet the price continues to be pushed down as though there was no limit to the number of shares for sale. How can it be that this many buyers want into the stock and yet the price will not go up. I would have thought, based on the previous decline in volume, that real sellers had been exhausted. It will be interesting to see if there is another jump in short interest on the next reporting date.
Thanks, revlis, that's what I was looking for.
I think that has been the fear of many here all along. Hopefully NOK would have t pony up a lot more than that before they got enough sellers to agree.
m3s, do we know or have we had some sort of confirmation from IDCC that it has reverse engineered the phones to determine infringement or is this just based on a logical assumption? Do we know that such a reverse engineering would prove infringement or are we depending on the position that IDCC's patents are "essential" or both? TIA
Which phone are you talking about and are you getting a discount?
sail, Some browsers don't work as well with Scottrades streamer as others. I have had some problems in the past with Firefox. Try closing your application. clearing your cache files and cookies and then restart the computer. That has helped me before.
paheka, if I recall correctly, IDCC's strategy includes setting a cap on the royalty dollar amount on a phone but then also places a floor in there too. This is to designed to make sure that the average amount per phone, expensive or cheap, brings in a measurable stream of income. It has the effect of broadening out IDCC's royalty base. I think the net effect is still very substantial income for IDCC, regardless of what the formula is.
paheka, I'm right there with you on this being a great article. There is one thing that should be kept in mind though when looking at the royalty % afforded to Broadcom. Broadcom sued over the use of its patents in chipsets, and the percentage of the sale was based on that one component of the mobile device. IDCC is charging a percentage of the entire phone which includes many devices that do not contain any IDCC IP. Consequently, the court may find it reasonable to support IDCC for the smaller percentage the company historically tries to license for.