How can 2 binding arbitrations and one court affirmation of the award with a $167 million bond being put up not be considered set in stone? Based on your knowledge I am certain legally you correct but to state that the award is not set in stone at this point is a bit of a stretch isn't it?
What do you think the likelihood of that being overturned is if instead of delaying the December appeal we had gone forward with it? I would think the bond money would be sitting in our bank now or in the very near future with 2006 resolution to be done by the end of this year.
So while it may not be totally accurate to say it is set in stone, I would think this award is about as certain as any could get. Since IMO that is the case, whatever settlement occurs, we have a basic idea of what is being paid for 2g. If the contract is written up in a way that makes it look like we are playing games with the numbers to make it look like the 3g rate is higher due to forgiveness of 2g it will create a big can of worms when dealing with Nokia and the rest. Everyone knows where we stand in regards to 2g that it is a virtual lock and hopefully the only thing management did with the 2g award is possibly give up some interest. In addition forgiving all 3g money owed up through the same date they did for Nokia would set in stone what is owed at what beginning date.
We have seen what happens when you structure a deal trying to lock in a slippery snake and how it can turn into a legal nightmare as was the case with the Ericy settlement. We announce in March 2003 how Sammy will owe this and Nokia will owe that and here we are approaching 6 years, that's right 6 years and we still haven't gotten the money from Sammy. Hopefully the contract is transparent so we are not discussing this in 2013 and how it will impact the Nokia 3g deal.
Loop, thanks for all the insight you provide and hopefully your decades long investment pays off for you and the rest of us. I would think this is the week and I am certain every night many here will have trouble sleeping. I know I have been having trouble sleeping wanting the morning to get here like a kid on Christmas Eve hoping to wake up to my great big IDCC present.
Message In Reply To:
DD
You are not providing factual information on the Samsung 2g at all. At this point IDCC has nothing set in stone except a judgment for the Samsung II award which continues under appeal. I do believe that IDCC must be forthcoming with the amount that it is applying to 2g in its settlement with Samsung because it is a one time revenue event. I do find it completely amazing that Samsung III has not issued a 2006 award. I would not use the ICA/ICC if it was free to settle disputes for me.
MO
loop
AI
