Replies to post #25588 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[mickeybritt]

Blueskywaves

A simple question for you, which officer at IDCC will resign of the option package is not approved? I personally would bet if you cut all of their salaries by 10% annually not a one would leave.

Mickey

[plumear]

BSWaves, you crack me up. Your lame attempt to discredit Ronny's reply to you is obvious to anyone who would read the thread. He gave you a direct response to a statement you made that was wrong. He cited the source, which was the proxy, that clearly stated the numbers to show you were wrong. Your laughable response was to accuse him of twisting the numbers. You end up by changing the subject in order to get out of the argument that YOU first brought up.

You have consistantly challenged the credibility of quite a few that have tried to engage you in a resonable discussion. Regardless of whether management should recieve additional otions or not, IMO it's your credibility that shrinks with every post you make. Now that's not an attack but rather an observation of fact.

[Learning2vest]

Maybe this is just another thing that I have over-simplified and made incorrect assumptions about, but it sure has been working for me so far. Info is not worth much until it gets verified as fact. It's the same whether somebody posts something about their own personal over-enthusiastic hopes and dreams OR some of their misguided criticisms IMO. It's all just passing "noise" until some facts can be independently validated. If it's not worth checking out, then it's not worth messing with.

After doing my share of checking out the facts surrounding a lot of scary sounding posts, and seeing how much unsupported personal "spin" gets posted, I found myself wondering why. Came up with a set of categories or "pigeon holes" that seemed to fit the answers for most of the reasons folks would post stuff without factual content, or stuff that is driven by their own personal needs and emotions. Some of the "pigeon holes" that get the most use are "must have a load of options about to expire", "too deep into the margin cookie jar again", "another short beginning to realize his mistake", "ticked off over mistakes made with his own IDCC investment", and even a "got canned from InterDigital and just cannot get over it" slot that seems to work for a few.

[rmarchma]

Bluesky correcting your inaccuracies is becoming a waste of my time. You said that according to the proxy, IDCC granted 82% of its options to the non-managerial employees in 2002. I clearly showed you where IDCC’s option grants to managers and directors amounted to 27% according to the proxy. So how can 82% of the option grants go to the non-managerial employees as you claim, when 27% went to managers and directors? Why don’t you get your facts straight before you report them as “facts”? Then you said in this referenced post that:

…”Total royalties went from less than $10M in 1999 to $88M in 2002.”

In 1999, IDCC recorded 31.5m paid-up royalties from Nokia, an $8m royalty advance from Robert Bosch, a $3.4m royalty advance from Japan Radio and Shintom, and recurring royalties of $9.5m. This was before royalty advances were deferred. These royalty amounts add up to much more than $10M according to my calculations. Have you invented some type of new math that I am unaware of?

Also you chart showing the outstanding shares over several years, which you have posted several times, has an error. The year where you show a significant increase to $57m and then a couple of years of decreases is plain wrong. You look it up, because I am tired of correcting your errors.

Finally you go on and on about IDCC’s superior stock price performance over 2001 and 2002. Well IDCC’s stock price freefell from $82 at the beginning of 2000 to about $5 at the end of 2000. This makes for a very low comparison base for the following two years. IDCC still operated at a Net Loss for 2001 and 2002. This is not a superior operating performance by my definition.