bulldzr .. I see nothing of investment significance that can come from conducting an "objective" analysis of posts on this subject to determine whether there has been more management "bashing" by those in opposition to #2 or more "bashing" by those in favor of #2 of posters who oppose it. It will not put one penny in my pocket or in anyone else's on this board I wager. All it would prove IMO is that as much as we would like to think of this as an investment forum it remains just a chat room after all these years and tens of thousands of posts.
I don't care how anyone votes on this board. They have as much right to vote their shares no as I do to vote mine yes. I don't care how many posts the no voters make on this board in support of their position or how strongly they argue their position in an attempt to convince others to vote no as long as the yes voters are granted the same privilege. And as strongly as I am opposed to "bashing" in any way, shape or form I'd even go so far as to say that I don't really care if some "bashing" of management and posters on both sides goes on in the process.
The reason I don't care is because I believe the future of IDCC's share price rest squarely with the institutions now. I doubt very much that many, if any of them, even read this board let alone are being influenced by what is posted here. However, when a splinter group from this board publicly announces that they have hired a professional to lobby the institutions directly for no votes on #2 the warning lights start to go off in the investment professional segment of my brain. These guys are about to mess with my "gold" (the institutions) and I know nothing about them other than their unwillingness to reveal their identities which sounded another warning bell for me. I know nothing about their motives, methods, professionalism or their level of integrity but the early returns on all four are not looking good to me. Most importantly, I don't know if their shareholder activism agenda extends beyond 6/4 and, if so, by how far and in what areas.
What I do know is that professional money managers do not like to own stocks where they perceive there is a significant chance of protracted shareholder unrest, particularly in today's environment. So, the only management bashing I'm at all concerned about is that which might be done by the lobbying group in their contact with the institutions. I'm disappointed that I can't seem to get even one of the no voters on this board to see that as a very real threat to the stock price.
Have a great Memorial Day.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
