Ronny, It find it facinating how message boards bring out a personality in people that they would not ordinarily display in regular daily interaction with other people. (Of course, I have also considered that much of my perception is partially a result of the fact that I don't have the benefit of seeing body language and other non-verbal communication signals when I form my opinions) You certainly don't deserve the abuse you've received from some though.
This board is seriously divided over the different opinions about managements performance. Prior to your meeting with the institutional investor groups several months back, many here complained about the lack of transparancy from IR and the difficulty in evaluating ones' investment in IDCC. You were one of the few that consistently formulated pertinent and concise questions that were based on the discussions here on this board. You then called IDCC and attempted to the best of your ability to get answers to those questions. You unselfishly reported the answers back to this board without editorializing them, which allowed all to formulate their own opinions. When IR asked that you refrain from posting the answers to your queries, you complied, in an effort to be fair to them and whatever their reasons for secrecy were. Additionally, your accounting analysis of financial records and releases from IDCC have for years helped the majority here better evaluate their position. Your contributions here run deep.
It appears that many are willing to overlook that point because they, utilizing the clarity of hindsight vision, disagree with you on one point. You apparently decided that, in order to feel secure with your investment in IDCC, you would discuss the unanswered questions with institutions that also had positions with IDCC. Regardless of whether some of the members of this board agree with you on that decision, it is your right as an individual investor to conduct DD into your investment. It is also apparent that once you engaged in the conversations concerning your questions, the institutions found those questions compelling; so much so that they requested a meeting with IDCC to discuss them. IDCC's refusal to that request resulted in at least one institution selling it's holding in IDCC. You have been critisized for that. However, if your efforts had borne a different fruit, the members of this board that have critisized you might instead be praising you. If your efforts had in fact resulted in a light shedding meeting and had resulted in giving us as investors a clearer view of the future of IDCC,(the goal of your meetings) the perception would likely be more like that which resulted when the Texas trio researched the courthouse records prior to the ERICY settlement. Everyone would have praised your efforts and you would be hailed as a hero. This is a fickle bunch though.
I too feel that in order to qualify as an investor, as opposed to being a gambler, my finacial decisions should be based on facts. In the absence of facts, a stockholder is left only with hopes, wishes and prayers. If you're counting on hopes and wishes, you're not likely to last long in the stock market. I'm personally saving the request for Divine Intervention for radically more important issues. (Don't figure I deserve a whole lot of favors)
Ronny, I appreciate your efforts here. Those that don't, are IMO, forgetful and shortsighted. Hang in there.
