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.
Found this quote on another board: "I think anytime you can buy a company that is reaching market saturation for only 500x this year's earnings I think you have to do it..."
Dripping with sarcasm and spot on if you get my drift. I have no earthly idea how the price will respond after the earnings announcement -- straddles have priced in about a 5% move in either direction -- but what I do believe is that this stock will be lower, much lower, by the end of the year. Something in the area of $35 - $45 post-split seems about right.
If this bloated puppy pops on Thursday, I'll be a put buyer.
"The net income has significantly decreased by 979.8% when compared to the same quarter one year ago, falling from $425.00 million to -$3,739.00 million".
Aside from the fact that Kramer (and, by extension The Street.com) has a less than stellar track record, the above statistic is grossly misleading since it takes into account a write-down of assets, i.e. a one-time charge. Absent that, the Company actually beat expectations last quarter ($.11 vs $.04) and remains cash-flow positive.
I don't expect a significant turnaround any time soon, but will remain patient as long as necessary. Note that the stock is currently trading ~$7 below its 200-day moving average and if you believe in the notion of "regression to the mean" you'll sit back, breathe deeply and wait for the price to coalesce with the averages. I expect that the Company will defend the dividend which has the effect of (slowly) reducing ones basis in the stock in the meantime.
Not a short seller but a put buyer at 685. I think the numbers speak for themselves.
Sorry to burst your bubble folks, but this is a $250 stock masquerading as a (now) $660 stock.
1) P/E around 170
2) Provider expenses increasing at a faster rate than revenues.
3) Rumors about entering the Chinese market are just that. Even if true, it won't happen nearly as quickly as people have been lead to believe.
4) No dividends.
5) High cash burn rate.
6) You really think that Apple (and others) doesn't have Netflix in their crosshairs?
7) Raising subscription rates will help the revenue stream only up to a point.
The stock is currently priced for perfection and any (even small) deviation from expectations on July 15th (or before) will not be received well by the market.
I'm reminded of tulips in Holland when I watch this stock.
Caveat emptor.
An excerpt of the following webpage appeared in my local paper today.
http://www.savetheinventor.com/
It's about time we got some blowback . . .
Loop:
I frankly have grown tired of your recent commentary (which grows more dour by the day). It's not that what you say has no merit, but rather that it further exposes the utter corruption of the courts in this country. What we have is a system where judges have set up their own fiefdoms, proceed on their own sweet time, and are accountible to no one as they evaluate which way the political wind is blowing. Up is up except when it's down, black is black except when it's white ad nauseum.
Despite what you and Ratboy may espouse to the contrary (i.e. urging us to be patient, tempered, and reasonable in our expectations), the issues being presented in SDNY, Delaware, England, and who knows wherever else are really quite straightforward. When our patents have been validated, revalidated, and re-revalidated and a Company continues to thumb their nose at us, the Courts, and contract law, I have an expectation that justice will prevail in a timely manner. When it doesn't, what I don't need is for you to become an apologist for "legal strategies" that mask deceit, duplicity, and dishonor.
If I were a judge, I would merely ask Nokia's lawyers if their GSM phones would work up to spec and as advertised if IDCC's patents were not imbedded. As I would anticipate that the answer would be "No" all the legal briefs and posturing in the world don't mean spit.
What we have been witness to for lo these many years is one great circle jerk where the only ones getting rich are your brethren and IDCC management.
They have ethics. They know they cheated
These posts get more bizarre every day
OK Let's review, boys and girls. 700,000+ shares have been sold at less than $19 per share. Some people just don't get it. MYOPIA REIGNS!!!
Semi OT
With the release of yesterday's PR, I'm reminded of what Michael J. Fox said to Andrew Shepard (Michael Douglas) in The American President
"GO AFTER THIS GUY"
To all
How much more judicial clarity do we need before the institutions start making a significant commitment? They've been standing on the sidelines for some time now.
Oh, good. If you want to stabilize a bad situation, Jorma's the first name that comes to my mind. NOT!
Ollila will have a very different challenge at Shell. Instead of pioneering a new high-tech industry, he will have to oversee the turnaround of a far larger company than Nokia, one which, while enormously profitable amid today's oil-price boom, has been rocked by scandal and an inability to replace the oil and gas it uses up each year
IDCC Rallying Cries
Send Nokia to Brat Camp
Will someone please bitch slap Jorma?
IDCC and 3G: It Merritts A Closer Look
Nokia: NO Known Integrity Anywhere
Jorma Bin Lyin': The IPR Terrorist
Amounts due IDCC: They take a lickin' but keep on tickin'
"Jorma, Eliot Spitzer on line 2"
Nokia: Stick a fork in them -- they're done!
L2V Do you have the sense that Nokia's legal team is approaching this in the manner of a criminal defense lawyer --"I don't care if my client is guilty or not. My job is to give him the best defense possible by probing the weaknesses of the opposition" Translated: If you throw enough sh*t at the wall, some of it may stick.
One would hope that an astute lawyer would pull Jorma aside and say "this is a dead bang loser" but we know (regrettably) that that's not going to happen. This gravy train is just too lucrative.
Loop:
Does this mean that the ICC could revise its decision UPWARD?
Since I think that response was directed to me . . .
You know what? You're absolutely right. But if people (also acting in their own self interest) stopped for a moment and considered that Nokia's behavior could have a chilling effect on innovation, future technological advances and corporate risk taking they might be willing to sacrifice that nickel . . .
Is it not clear to you that Nokia's strategy is not to minimize IPR royalties, but to eliminate them? You would decry those who download movies or music without just and fair compensation or those who sell items obtained through "reverse engineering" etc etc. How, may I ask, is this any different? And to hide behind the nuance of "law" to legitimize their behavior? When there are no absolutes in the law, but only shades of gray, it gives people like Jorma the license to gin the system to their own benefit.
When the law and those who practice it have lost their way, it's up to the common folk to seek justice elsewhere.
Sjrrat, you said:
"While I want IDCC to prevail as much as the next person, these cries for boycott and other whinings are ridiculous. Nokia is doing what any rational company would do...attempt to maximize its bottom line. If Nokia feels that the potential gains from an appeal outweight the potential costs, then it should appeal. Indeed, it owes that much to its shareholders. And, if IDCC were in Nokia's shoes, we would want the company to do whatever it could to maximize its bottom-line. The cries of boycott are emotionally driven and overlook true business logic. And, yes, I understand the issue of so-called business ethics, but we are well past that point now and Nokia is simply looking out for itself and its shareholders. In the end, we can only hope that Nokia has miscalculated, and that it will result in a significant sum of additional interest in IDCC's pocket."
First of all, I was not whining and I resent the implication. Second, a call for a boycott is not ridiculous in the context that the legal system that you defend to your last breath is not functional if it permits this type of behavior. Due process is not due process if it takes, what 10+ years?, to complete the adjudication of this (larger) dispute. What this suggests to me is that the relevant statutory guidance and case law is so irreparably convoluted that a rational, common sense conclusion is only as good as the next appeal.
A CALL TO ACTION
This is an appeal to fair-minded men and women who have respect for the value of contributions to the betterment of society and our standard of living, fair play, and the protections and remedies our legal system offers for dispute resolution.
The Nokia Corporation, by its recent actions, has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that it does not respect those values that the rest of us hold dear. By its very size, it has revealed itself to be nothing more than a corporate bully in its attempt to dishonor its obligations, pervert the intent of the legal system, and manage the dissemination of "information" to the investment comminity and, by extension, the public at large.
It has done this through a four-pronged strategy aimed directly at Interdigital Corporation and indirectly at every other patent holder in the wireless communication space.
1) By contesting the recent arbitration judgement rendered by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in favor of IDC that Nokia originally requested and by hinting that it would not honor its obligation to pay, it has "thumbed its nose" at an institution whose judgements are respected by virtually all those that appear before it. Furthermore, by releasing to the public the particulars of the Tribunal's decision along with details of the dissenting opinion, it has arguably violated the confidentiality provisions of the decision. Nokia has further hinted that it intends to continue its appeal not, presumably, because it has any hope of prevailing, but to signal to IDC and others that it intends to make the cost of successful arbitration/collection as high as possible.
2) Nokia is on record as attempting to minimize its cost of patent licensing for 3rd generation (3G) wireless communications by seeking to collude with other handset manufacturers to place a ceiling on the rate paid to intellectual property right (IPR) holders. That this flies in the face of the essence of capitalism which provides that each patent holder is rewarded (or not) with a market price without regard to maximums of other indications of price fixing.
3) Nokia, by its recent suit filed in Delaware, is attempting to invalidate IDC's 3G patent portfolio, as part of its "scorched earth" campaign to minimize (or eliminate entirely) its royalty obligations with respect to 3G licensing. That these patents have been approved by the US Patent Office and have been validated by the 3G standards committee apparently is not sufficient evidence of their value.
4) Nokia has attempted to manage the public dissemination of information by taking advantage of their size and the "believability" of their press releases. That they have misinformed the public and concealed their true strategic intentions is of no matter so long as their words are successful in drowning out dissenting opinions. As they say, the first thing to go out the window in a war is the truth.
I therefore call on all investors, consumers, and those who believe that the success of America depends on the ability of IPR holders to be fairly rewarded for their contributions to the betterment of us all to boycott all Nokia products until such time as the Company honors its economic obligations and ceases its strategy of attempting to define what "is" is.
Thank you in advance for your support.
Disclosure: I am an IDCC shareholder. I invested in the Company because I believe that 3G technology (with its related applications)will significantly improve our ability to do those things that we value above all else -- free trade and the disseminate of information.
OT: Glenny
Good start for your Dawgs but we're T4 (UNLV) with 3 rounds to go and we've got Ryan Moore!!!!
Good luck to everyone today
After reading the excellent contributions to this thread re: the implications of Judge Lynn's ruling, I come down on the side of those who believe that the time has come to take the legal wrangling out of the equation and to let the arbitration take its course -- or, as we say here in Vegas, "Shuffle up and deal!"
Gman:
You're probably right in your assessment. My thought was that, while the contribution of the Sierra license (200k/qtr) probably isn't enough to move the stock price in any meaningful way, it would signal to the market that IDCC is able, absent a settlement with Nokia/Samsung, to license for 3G. Since this apparently is a concern for many who follow this stock (i.e. IDCC is dead money until that episode is resolved), the Sierra contract should have eliminated some of the near-term risk associated with IDC shares -- but then, what do I know?
Also, it would seem rational that, if you believe that IDCC will be significantly higher post-Nokia (as I do), you would commit to the stock now in order to avail yourself of the favorable tax treatment later. That should give the stock a boost, but I guess it's the times we live in -- anything in excess of 3 weeks is considered LONG TERM.
Understood, but the "public flogging" of the last week was way overdone IMO, so I would have expected more of a snap back. Not expressing impatience, but a bit of a surprise.
TeeCee: I would have thought that, with a new licensee and an up market today, conditions would be ripe for a short squeeze. But at 500,000 shares traded so far, this is somewhat of a disappointment, no?
BRAVO Dishfan. That was well thought out and beautifully constructed.
A focus of this thread last week revolved around the notion of a "watershed event" and whether we would recognize it if it occurred. I believe that we will all look back on the events of December 8th and realize that this was the moment that our Company was called up to the big leagues. The irony is that the seminal event which jumpstarted our renaissance in the eyes of Wall Street was an article in a mainstream financial publication which displayed a reckless disregard of the truth. I can just hear Howard now "Lady, you know what? You were right -- we're nothing but a bunch of litigators. And here's a libel suit for you to suck on".
At any rate, I attempted to do my part to defend my Company today by increasing my stake by 10%. I hesitated to do it for diversification reasons but it's no longer about just one Company. It's about standing up to lies, deceit, theft, and reneging on a promise. Covering shorts, day traders, arbitrageurs, Goliaths -- I'm putting you on notice. Everyone may have a price, but I'll be collecting for value, reparations, and PAIN & SUFFERING.
Zitboy: Think about what you're saying. The charts are wrong exactly half the time. Otherwise, pricing would be deterministic and we know (with certainty) that that is not the case.
$28.50 by June 4th.
The Investor Alert from IDCC appeared to invite comment to either Guy Hicks or Janet so to vent my anger I submitted the following:
Subj: Re: Trial delay
Date: 1/15/2003 7:36:28 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Lbrtarian
To: guy.hicks@interdigital.com
Mr. Hicks:
Why stop there (i.e. May 15th)? Why not push it back to 2008 or 2010? After all, its only been nearly 10 years since this suit was filed! It's clear to me that InterDigital, Ericsson, their respective attorneys, and the Federal District Court of Texas have never heard of due process. At this point, many loyal shareholders are tired of this pissing contest (which is how it appears because of InterDigital's now legendary reticence to say anything of value to shareholders -- I point you to the Q&A section of each conference call as Exhibit A) -- they just want it to be over. This episode is delaying the introduction and implementation of W-CDMA and preventing more than a year's worth of accruals from Nokia and Samsung from finally hitting the books.
Furthermore, starting in after hours today and continuing with the opening bell tomorrow, investors will "vote with their feet" which further reinforces the notion that the only two constituencies who are benefiting from this Chinese water torture are InterDigital executives who continue to be awarded stock options to a degree not supportable by results and the lawyers.
Yours truly,
Richard D. Holtgrieve