InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 61
Posts 7537
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 02/10/2010

Re: downsideup post# 58524

Wednesday, 10/10/2012 5:01:09 PM

Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:01:09 PM

Post# of 60937
I tend to agree with idea that formally assigning Diac the fractional percent ownership of the patent accomplished two things.

Primarily - the removal of any potential objections that could be made by T-Mobile regarding whether (or not) Diac & his Lawyers had a standing to sue.

Secondarily - a signal of sorts that the 28% (+ World-Wide benefits) issue was a non-starter with the Reciever.

Maybe I'm just seeing this glass (such as it is) as half-full by thinking this way? Possibly. But the Reciever would have been just as easily served by stating that in his standing as Reciever (and deciderer) here that the 28% deal with Diac was solid. That would have squelched most objections by T-Mobile as well (IMO).

Keep in mind that Diac does hold a substantial chunk of (likely) legally obtained shares that can't & won't be taken away from him regardless of the decision on what fraction (0.01% or 28%) of the patent he does own.

We get a big settlement or ruling and a big sale on the pantent's value,... he wins bigger than most here just by being among the biggest elephants in the room.

“The two most powerful warriors are patience and time.”
- Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.