Nico,
My understanding is that Marathon was never looking at SPEX as a merger, rather just an opportunity to possibly get their assets at a reasonable price. I actually agree with the previous posters comments on what really happened there. I'm not going to go into it, but he's pretty close on the SPEX CEO comment as it's been told to me from various sources. I think you may be reaching a little that MARA was actively seeking a merger candidate back when the SPEX situation arose.
Again, to me that was always merely an interest in an asset purchase if it could be bought cheap. Many have questioned whether it really officially ever advanced to the stage SPEX claimed in their "well timed" press release. I can tell you a few here previously said they talked to the company that day and they were pleasantly surprised to hear SPEX's take. Nonetheless, it no longer matters. SPEX is and never will be a Uniloc, where a merger of equals leads to a combined possible powerhouse bettering the whole.
Why are they doing it with Uniloc? Probably because Lakestreet are Uniloc's bankers and brought it to Marathon as a possibly mutually beneficial opportunity almost 6 months ago as they've clearly said publicly. Let's face it, if just a fraction of what both companies have said is true, then it makes complete and perfect sense. Everything in this space has changed and scale is the key. All the analysts have stated the same. You watch, give it a year and all those smaller players could easily be gone with just two left standing, Acacia and Marathon Group.
As you already know, the two companies combined are on the scale of Acacia with 101 trials, 119 defendants, 150 more potential additional licensees, complimentary court calendars, a combined 662 assets, top management, proprietary analytics platform with a stellar track record never losing in actual trial, and economies of scale on the cost side. When opportunity knocks, open the damn door. I think time could ultimately prove the deal absolutely brilliant.
Moving on, I totally agree that in hindsight, they should have printed a deal and sold equity when the shares were higher. You make a good point. Looking back, I'm sure even they would have to admit that was a missed opportunity. Hard to argue otherwise, I agree. I too wish they had, we'd likely never be here at current levels had that occurred.
Regarding Andrulis, I don't believe they ever owned, currently own, or invested a dime in those patent assets. They may have spent a very nominal amount to advance their monetization through the Markman hearing as a partner of the owner, but not much of consequence or loss on investment as far as you and I are concerned. You might call the company to confirm, but I believe I'm accurate. Flyers could also confirm I assume.
You ask some other good questions, but I'm short on time for now. I think it obviously you're not just trying to stir the pot. I appreciate the intelligent discussion and the way in which you presented your opinions. Look forward to more in the future, thank you.
