I'm not disagreeing with your point that AIG was speculating or not.
Of course they were it's a $3.00 stock which at the time had everything hinged on a victory in court against Google. How could they not be?
It is true that institutions, even very large ones, will dabble in speculative stocks from time to time. To that end, I would expect them to have a shorter leash with unproven, pre-revenue companies that are heavily involved with litigation.
All, this was know prior to the speculation. There is no mystery here, they knew what they were buying. This isn't some kid buying his first stock
My point is the Vringo story has undergone several significant changes along the way and any competent institution will adjust their investment thesis with the changing story. That doesn't mean their research or DD was wrong, it just means that at some point the investment/speculative trade no longer meshed with the institution's strategy -- short or long term
None of the significant changes warrants a dumping from one quarter to the next. They have a court victory, we will find out what the award will be soon. They have 3 cases against ZTE in Europe, now they have one against Microsoft. They have 500 patents from Nokia to exploit and they have the brilliant Lang who is working on some project. with all that you say its ok to take a pass? You think 4 months is enough time to demonstrate management's worth? I say no way. Let's see what Alyeska Investment Group Ashley Keeler's company did last quarter as an example. He would be more in tune with what's going on being on the board than Aig