Opinions from my dad.
One of my dads friends visited him last night and filled him in on current IDCC events. He asked that I relay his thoughts.
Although it appears strange that HG and RT would suddenly be terminated, a reveiew of the company position now provides a plausible explanation. HG has been a good figurehead during the rebuilding efforts because of his extremely frugal demeanor. During the survival times, it has been important to have a leader that would keep down expenses. The problem with such an approach is that it stifles the risk/reward mentality which creates additional revenue. We tripled our engineering force for rhe Nok project and have kept them on board since its completion. Thus, we have remained with fixed costs, but have not really expanded the marketing side in order to get a reasonable return on the dollar for their efforts. I believe this is a result of HG not having enough understanding of the proper use of the engineering department. I also believe that the make up of the BOD lacked experience in these matters. This is where MG came into play and I believe he frightened HG and HC with his agressive plans for engineering contract work. The frugal won over the foresight at that time and perhaps has held the company back somewhat and could have limited the real productivity of our CTO's. I further believe that the lack of marketing the engineering talents has not fully apprised the industry of the inventive side of of IDCC. You have to spend money to make money and name recognition is extremely important.
As far as RT is concerned, his downfall was his title as COO. The companies in this sector literally had no respect for his credentials and therefore did not take IDCC as being the true inventer it has turned out to be. RT was basically an analyst recruiter, but his overall knowledge of the science was not conducive to captivating his targeted audience. He further could not properly argue for the budget necessary to establish the inventive talents of IDCC in the forefront with serious targets such as operators service providers.
I believe both gentlemenn worked very hard with what they had to offer, but the recent board appointees were sector savy enough to recognize their limitations and conclude that each could no longer advance the company any further than the survival and start up stage.
I believe that the new board also recognizes that HC will soon out live his effectiveness as we go past the survival and start up stage. We need sector pros right now and WM has had the most dealings with sector by the very nature of his job over the last several years. I believe the new board members from the industry sector have recognized this and beleiev he is the best man for the position at this time. This is a very proactive movement on the part of the board and I do not believe it originally offered by HC.
I believe that our CTO's will now have an increased budget and be extended longer reins for pushing engineering contacts, more communications with sector operators and perhaps service providers. IDCC has receieved recent recognition as a concept company in the MUOS project and this should open additional doors in the future. IDCC believes that it can save costs for operators and a budget allowing individual contacts may result in steady and substantial annual revenue in the years to come.
WM negotiated the Ericy deal and sold shares after the CC putting his beliefs all on the line. He certainly understands the precarious position he is in and will go overboard to finalize the Nok?Samsung matters satisfactory to the shareholders and analysts of IDCC.
This is all I am going to let my dad do today. He said to remind everyone that what I typed his opinion.
I want to thank you all for your kind words about my dad. He really likes your group. He has never been shy about his opinions.
Thank you
Connie
AI
