Replies to post #51968 on XpresSpa Group Inc (XSPA)

[kens60]

Cliff did his best to get us some news this morning. Here it is:


UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549



FORM 8-K



Current Report

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): April 2, 2014



VRINGO, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)



Delaware 001-34785 20-4988129
(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation) (Commission
File Number) (I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)

780 Third Avenue, 15th Floor, New York, NY 10017
(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: [phone]


Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

• Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

• Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

• Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

• Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))

[JJSeabrook]

I don't see how this decision would affect VRNG, personally. I recall that VRNG's expert had a chart which showed the immediate increase in advertising revs just as soon as AdWords went into use by GOOG which provided a basis for what percentage of GOOG's revs were directly attributable to AdWords. There was also testimony as to other royalty percentages of 3 1/2%, which the jury went with.

JJ

[sluicer]

It seems this could have more weight in the VHC trial against Apple. In that case Apple tried to implement a work around, but received hundreds of thousands of complaints about the poor service. I think it will result in the CAFC lowering the rate to the juries' number of .52%(from the judges' .98%), but not adjusting the figure on the lowest possible price paid, which would really hammer the damages if they chose to put say a $50 price as a rate base vs. the price of the whole phone of something like $500.