"totally qualified to critique..compensation" - Danny, do you believe ...
* Tom Carpenter is qualified to call for HC's resignation in favor of a more industry connected Chm?
* ISS is qualified to conclude that the "compensation system" at IDCC is excessive, based on their independent and in depth peer based analysis?
* The majority of voting thinking caring shareholders is qualified to deny management's request for 5M more ISO shares?
* That our largest institutional investor is qualified to refer to management "greed"?
* The independent compensation study by Dr. Ira-Kay at Watson Wyatt Worldwide, entitled "Stock Option Overhang-Shareholder Boon or Shareholder Burden?" concluding that the amount of ISO grants, such as we have at IDCC, result in a "dilution effect" that far outweighs any "incentive effect"? (FYI- Watson Wyatt, www.watsonwyatt.com, is a global consulting firm focused on human capital and financial management)
* The majority of voting thinking caring shareholders is qualified to recommend a declassified BoD 2 years in a row?
* That ISS is qualified to conclude that HC is an affiliated and not a completely independent outside director?
* That ISS is qualified to recommend a vote of "withhold" on HC's reelection?
"I can't believe the arrogance of..." posters like you who proclaim the expertise of analysts and institutional investors unless they disagree with your completely baseless views.
At least I agree with the majority of thinking, caring, open minded voting shareholders and very well qualified compensation and corporate governance experts, analysts, and institutional investors.
MO,
Corp_Buyer
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
