InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 14
Posts 341
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/02/2003

Re: sophist post# 22940

Monday, 05/05/2003 4:04:50 PM

Monday, May 05, 2003 4:04:50 PM

Post# of 432922
In those cases IDCC never said it expected to receive those amounts. It was improper to speculate, based on those amounts, about IDCC revenue income.

LOL. But you know how it goes. All it takes is one malcontent with a bad case of proportion to mouth off on this message board then others pick up on it and amplify it and before you know it, we have a sizable "pennies on the dollar" crowd reinforcing each other with increasingly flawed data.
It's part of the perception game that IDCC now has to play now that it has the financial gravitas to increase institutional ownership from less than 30% to more than 50%.


Perhaps the Option Plan should have been proposed as a conditional one, that such and such an Option Plan will only take effect and be duly authorized upon the agreement and payment of Nokia and Samsung in full as now anticipated from the ERICY settlement.

That sounds like an unorthodox option plan that you don't see many companies use. If you look at the 1996 and 1997 10Qs and 10Ks you can track the progress of the shareholder lawsuits that hit IDCC after the 1995 Motorola debacle. One would think that current management has learned useful lessons from that event. That's one form of check and balance. I also assume that management is at least as smart as me so why would any rational management spoil IDCC's hard-earned transition from a turnaround company to a bonafide growth company with a stunt like that?








Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent IDCC News