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.
Stock is at its 13 year low. Toys will never become obselete. This is a steal at this price
Just curious, but what are your top 5 stock picks to watch as far as speculation goes for major upside? I have been following you for almost a year now and you seem to be the most intuitive person I have stumbled upon. No need to reply if you don't feel like it. Thanks
Sorry, thanks for the correction. So you did take a loss, with the rest of us. I applaud you even more. You have been very informative, even though most here don't agree with me.
Unfortunately for me, I tried to sell all around $0.34 market order but alas it took about 3-5 minutes and went all the way down to 0.28 to sell it all, for a deep loss. Guess that's how OTC stocks roll.
Everyone can't really be mad at Joe... because he did his DD and just posted his findings on this board.
Yes, he sold before he posted the info, but so what? Would you rather he have posted the info first on this board, then sell??? We all would have done the same. He posted he bought in at $0.37 and sold at $0.40. I appreciate his honesty.
Joe deserves major respect, as without him posting the delay, most or almost all of us would still be in the dark.
If anything, I have lost respect for World's management team, Mr. CEO and the attorneys, as they were the ones that got the PACER immediately after it was posted, and did not put out a PR for their shareholders to be aware. Instead they drove the price down from around $0.46-$0.49 down to $0.38-$0.42 over the past several days.
I am sure the attorneys were informed there would be a delay before the official PACER hit.
And the last bit, yes I lost a good amount of money on this sour info today, but alas have took all my funds and locked in a position in AMD as the $4.00 call options are about to expire on the 22nd, and its getting ready to rip once this happens.
I am wondering what prompted him to call the court today, that is all...
lol, I was wondering the exact same thing!!! hmmm
Yes he did, but he used the 20.9% base as the absolute bottom baseline figure of when they first started using Lang's patents back in 2004.
It's definitely not reflective of what they actually account for as of current, which could be considerably higher as shown in the slide presented at trial stating possibly greater than 40%.
Of course, one can conclude GOOG does not want to offer any # for a baseline as they of course know its well past the 20.9% shown, and even past the 40% suggested in the slide.
If the revenue gained was actually lower than 20.9%, they would have offered that at trial, or somewhere in their post-trial motions.
I try my best to show facts with my comments, so as not to make up things out of thin air like alot of posters do as of late. I hope other posters (cough "I been had" cough) do the same.
Positive criticism of course!
Pacer Docket #783 - Exhibit A
Pacer # 783 - Exhibit A - Page 7 - PDX 43
And here is a direct link to the picture for the lazy.
Ads before SmartAss
Your looking at everything correctly. Just imagine if you had to make a ruling on this, what would be the most logical outcome?
From a fairness standpoint based on facts, 20% and 40% were shown at trial.
Also, the jury chose a 3.5% running royalty(non-infringement RR). The day the jury rendered it's verdict, GOOG became a willful infringer. Because of willful infringement, the court has the ability to multiply the non-infringement rate at 2x-3x the RR. Lets assume a max of 10% RR.
Now lets meet somewhere in the middle on all these facts. That's where 5%-7% of 30% is a fairly reasonable judgement based on the facts known.
Judge could also just decide to keep the 20.9% base and make the RR 3.5%
Both these judgements are fair, but only Judge Jackson knows how fair he's going to rule.
From his past cases, it seems he has no issue of raising the RR to account for willful infringement, well past anything the jury has conjured.
Two other facts people also need to remember. GOOG played dirty on getting the laches ruling, and lied about being in settlement talks with VRNG, to the judge, as evidenced in VRNG's pacer filings.
Also, as a good refresher to all: Pacer Docket # 821
BTW Mr. Seabrooks, since your bringing the beer, I drink Corona or any hand-crafted beer (for the mystery flavor high).
On the last conference call this past November, VRNG did promise to reveal something that would get investors excited, basically what Ken Lang has been working on all this time, and it was suppose to be announce before the end of the year. It's now March, and I must say I am still curious as to what it could be. Guess it's not ready to be unvealed to stockholders just yet it would seem.
As of now, it's just a waiting game as to what running royalty Judge Jackson will choose, which is why this is being traded so tightly.
Personally, I am realistically expecting 5%-7% of 30% of GOOG's revenues as evidence (slideshow) was shown the patents created an instant 20% boost in GOOG's revenues when they first utilized them, and that the number is more along the lines of 40% as of current. This was the only evidence given at trial by VRGN.
If it was anything lower, GOOG would have proffered their own evidence showing a lower revenue #%. Since they did not, this concludes the revenue gain realized by the VRNG patents was more than 40%. Also, GOOG is now a willful infringer, and have been for the past four months.
Remember why you are investing.
Like Warren Buffet says, do your homework based off facts, and ignore what everyone else says.
1/3/13 Pacer #853 - REPLY to Response to Motion....By Google
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByyR-FelC5OTVFJwLW1YR2R2azQ/edit
In case anyone was looking for the original copy, like I was, since I didn't see any links in the last 200 post! Sorry if I missed it.
Google lied about negotiation talks in its last motion, then VRNG put them on blast about never being contacted by Google since the jury's verdict, and now Google is saying they have not contacted VRNG because they are waiting for the court to rule on motions so the can have more accurate information to negotiate with...
So they got caught lying to JJ, with their foot in their a$$, and are now trying to save face.
If I were the judge, it's time to let them know who's boss, and not with a slap on the wrist either. time to let them know stealing is stealing, especially with the way the jury found them guilty on all counts.
When PPS hits $10, I will sell 25% of my shares, then at $15 another 25%, then at $20 one last 25% sell. The remaining 25% of shares I will hold until they get bought out, hopefully above $30.
To fix this error in VRNG's favor would give GOOG grounds for an appeal. I believe this is the reason they did not ask for hte error to be "Fixed" by the judge. That's why they put the sub-note about the error, and not an official paragraph in the post-trial motion.
Alphi, the real problem I had is not the silly, whimsical argument they tried to make about 3.5% of 2.8% of US Revenues, but the audacity to slide this statement below in their motion, stating VRNG is not entitled to ANY damages or a running royalty. Blatant disrespect to the justice system as a whole.
Page 9 sub 2
So GOOG thinks VRNG "is not entitled to any damages, including a running royalty, from any defendant." D.N. 805 Page 9 Sub 2, last line.
Very brave to make such a bold statement, for being found guilty on all counts by a jury.
Entertaining theory GOOG has as to how the jury made an error, and not even remotely close to being a logical or even realistic argument, imo.
Even a ninth grader could make a more convincing story than this.
Seems as if GOOG played right into VRNG's hand, so as to make the error obvious.
Classic Sun Tzu "The Art of War" type play.
Thanks man, finally a good answer.
So basically, this is the judgement the judge has decided on, which has started the countdown for motions from both sides as to the 3.5% in question.
I take it the judge, after looking at all the motions made, will then make his final ruling once he see's what both party's have submitted?
But here is the part that has me pondering. GOOG at this point is now a willful infringer, ever since the jury gave their verdict to my understanding. What is to stop VRNG from suing GOOG again. This time for willful infringement?
Read this nicely written article then reread the last couple paragraphs:
http://www.fr.com/patentroyalties/
"Most courts have also set the post-verdict ongoing royalty higher than the pre-verdict rate, including the Paice remand, Creative Internet, Cummins-Allison, and Boston-Scientific. This seems correct. The ongoing royalty compensates the patentee for surrendering its right to file a new lawsuit to address the continued infringement. In that lawsuit, collateral estoppel would prevent the defendant from raising any defenses on the merits. And a willfulness finding would be almost certain because the defendant could not believe in good faith that its actions were permissible, which would expose it to the risk of treble damages and attorney fees. A defendant would surely pay much more to avoid such risk than it would have paid pre-verdict."
So it seems that if no settlement is reached, and if the running royalty is not raised from 3.5% to say 5% or 7% to compensate VRNG from suing GOOG again, then VRNG will certainly sue GOOG again for willful infringement now, and will surely have the courts in its favor because of GOOG's continued use of the patents after the jury gave its verdict.
Something to think about...
So EDVA thinks the "final ruling" has been given by the judge by docket report # 801.
I will admit, something that reads "Judgement in a Civil Case" sounds 100% to me like a final ruling, as it has so been ordered by and signed by a judge.
I just do NOT see how this is the "Final Ruling" as there are no specifics as to how the 3.5% is to be based, no pre-judgement interest as well as other usual data that is usually accompanied in a judges final ruling. Especially when I look at past judgements, they look nothing like this.
Mr. JJ Seabrooks, or anyone very knowledgeable in legal matters, could you please enlighten us a little on this, based on this document # 801 below:
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/virginia/vaedce/2:2011cv00512/271949/801/0.pdf?ts=1354096836
And if an answer is given can you please support if with facts, not opinions as to the final ruling issue.
Here are some other final rulings from other cases in eastern district of virginia
http://www.justice.gov/tax/McBryde_PermInj.pdf
http://wolpoffandabramsonclassaction.com/pdf/Final%20Order%20and%20Judgment%20Approving%20Class%20Settlement.pdf
http://ifcreceivership.com/graphics/docket106.pdf
Thanks Ken for keeping up the positive attitude! And when the FINAL JUDGEMENT comes, this stock is going to skyrocket! Get ready for the fireworks my friend!
Probably took the clerk the better part of two weeks just to draft up that laches document for the judge to sign.
AFAIK a FINAL Judgement can come at any moment. This is a Rocket Docket court so I don't think it will take over a month for JJ to give his Final Verdict, but you never really know. Motions will be filed before and after it is given as you can see from all the motions being released today.
So just be patient, and have your portfolio loaded, because when the judge gives his FINAL RULING, I believe we will see a T1 halt, then reopen depending on how much the RR is confirmed to be. JJ could make it 3.5%, or he could make it 5%, or possibly even 7% because google as of NOW is still infringing upon the Lang Patents.
Money won't really come until FINAL VERDICT is given by judge, or a settlement is negotiated.
Still gotta hold!
Hmmm, interesting... But the evidence showed that the # is around 40% NOW, was only 20% when they first started using Ad Words.
I would be happy with either 3.5% of 40% of GOOG's US Revs or better yet 3.5% of GOOG's US Revs.
It's really all a guessing game until JJ gives his FINAL VERDICT.
Document # 802, 803, 804
802 MOTION to Seal and Redact Portions of Trial Record by Google Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Noona, Stephen) (Entered: 11/21/2012)
803 Memorandum in Support re 802 MOTION to Seal and Redact Portions of Trial Record filed by Google Inc.. (Noona, Stephen) (Entered: 11/21/2012)
804 NOTICE by Google Inc. re 802 MOTION to Seal and Redact Portions of Trial Record and of Intent to Request Redaction (Noona, Stephen) (Entered: 11/21/2012)
Yes, that would be something, as that would mean $5-$6 Billion for us.
Could you imagine VRNG saying they have reached a settlement with GOOG...
They start reading the amount....$2.5 Billion dollars!
Lol, then I believe this stock would break $30 PPS and Mr. Donald E. Stout can finally sell some of his shares for a nice profit!
Now that the 3.5% is out, I would think if a settlement is to occur, it would be somewhere in the middle of the lowest and highest possible outcomes. Which doing a litle math with my handy dandy 8 digit calculator, shows that:
$500,000,000 + $1,000,000,000 / 2 = $75,000,000
oops honest mistake, I meant $750,000,000 :)
Let's hope the 3.5% is based off GOOGs Total US Revenue, and not the 20%-40% of Total. That would be a real kicker for US!
I have not seen one shred off evidence in any document stating what the 3.5% should be based of off, so one could assume it could be 3.5% of GOOGs total US Revs, which would be about $5-$6 Billions for us! I can dream can't I?
I agree. Looking at evidence, I really wonder what the 3.5% will be based off of. From what I recall, VRNG showed a slide stating that AD Words initially made GOOG 20% gains, and that as of CURRENT AD Words account for around 40% as of today.
Ad Words 40% Gains Currently Slide Evidence
So If they base the 3.5% off 20% of GOOG Total US Revenue then that would amount to around 500M for VRNG.
But if they base the 3.5% off 40% of GOOG Total US Revenue, then we could be looking at $1 BILLION+ in running royaties from GOOG.
I have no reason to see why it would not be based off 40% IMO as that seems to be case, going off the slide evidence VRNG posted.
Well, to me it seems the jury had a decision to make about past damages. I don't think they should have lessened GOOG's liability to 1/10th of every elses, just because they are going to get hit with a Running Royalty. Past damages should be calculated as such that the punishment is equal to some degree to all defendants.
Because GOOG is still infringing on the Lang patents as of current, they should pay a RR in my mind, regardless. That should not get them off the hook for paying 1/10th the fine all the other companies should pay. Which still leads me to believe a critical jury error was made.
Judge Jackson Order #801 RR confirmed 3.5%
http://www.scribd.com/doc/114046389/Judge-Jackson-Order-801
This is a classic game of Texas Hold'em.
Sitting at the table is VRNG, GOOG, AOL, IAC, Gannett, and Target.
The dealer deals.
GOOG is up $50,000 has two kings in their hand. VRNG with it's last $2000... has only a seven and and ace. GOOG raises $500, everyone checks except VRNG. VRNG sees the $500 and raises $500 more. Everyone checks again except GOOG. GOOG being greedy raises $500 again. Everyone checks again. Except VRNG. VRNG sees their $500 and goes all in with their last $500. Everyone checks.
Everyone shows their cards.
On the flop is king, king, ace. GOOG is certain they got this in the bag! Already doing their celebration dance.
Next card, another ace.... GOOG stops dancing. Uncertainty is now setting in.
Both sides are holding their breath... Not sure what to expect..
The next card... BOOM... another ace...
VRNG wins big!
GOOG is shocked, and can not believe what just happened, pulls out a calculator and starts doing the math.
Odds of this ever happening were one in 1 in 17,917,577.
I will be stalking my prey as well Monday morning. Thanks for the heads up.
I think it would be best for both of us to just reach a settlement, so your not infringing upon my copyrighted work! No injunction needed!
Thanks. I will add this to my bag of tricks, and wait until another "deadcat bounce" comes along.
Just wondering what made you decide to buy in morning hours around $1.92? Is it common for a drug to lose FDA Panel vote, TANK, then slowly recover back towards original stock price, until the final ruling for this stock in Feb?
I know you are a well seasoned trader, for longer than I have been alive, and just wondering to get some insight on how you achieved your noteworthy 25.52% gain.
My purpose is to learn and gain knowledge from wise trader's, and eventually retire by the time I'm 30, and then trade for fun off of free shares, as you do.
I'm gonna sue you for "copyrighted opinion infringement" lmfao1234... Just kidding!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=81325938
just remember, a wise poster once said, when the boards become quiet, then the real money will be made on this stock.
It's getting mighty quiet here!
Thanks