XpresSpa Group Inc (XSPA)

[postyle]

It's misleading. IDCC's deal with Apple is an outlier. First, it was signed in 2007 and was a fixed fee contract (not a per-unit license). At the time (2007) it was hard to expect the entire amount of sales volumes Apple was able to grow year after year between then and 2014. And when you reverse engineer a per phone royalty from that 2007 flat fee (per qtr) you get skewed results.

Second, IDCC also got compensated from Apple products from various ODMs (contract manufacturers) and chip designs. So for example, Infineon paid IDCC per iPhone for using certain protocol stacks in their chips that were inside iPhones. And Pegatron also has a license with IDCC, whereby IDCC makes significantly more from that license than it does with the Apple license.

But in general, ZTE is arguing something I have been saying from the start. The published rates in the now infamous VRNG term sheet are not market rates and investors should never be expecting those kind of rates. They are starting point for VRNG to begin negotiations.

But it's hard to negotiate with a patent evader like ZTE who published confidential documents and breaks NDAs.