Points on this NOKIA/IDCC dispute.
First, With NOKIA allowing for 93 Mil Euro and IDCC claiming that NOKIA owes $100-$120 Mil it appears to me that both sides are very close on what should be paid. Go back to last year when the board was speculating rates of .75 to 1.50. NOKIA got what it wanted .5/.4 and IDCC offered that same rate to ERICY.
IMO, the .5 % rate is the ballpark that both NOKIA and IDCC deem as fair. Why else would NOKIA's accrual be so close to IDCC's forecast and ERICY settlement rate?
Secondly, didn't one of the analysts confirm with NOKIA that IDCC has a contract and they are not disputing the validity of the contract? Forgive me if I'm wrong but I distinctly remember something to that effect after the ERICY settlement.
Bottom line, IDCC doesn't need the money. NOKIA will stall as long as it can. If you had to fork over $200 million would you be in a rush?
My feeling is that they are using the 2G payments to finalize a rate for 3G. Why fork over $200 mil and start from scratch when you need additional licensing. NOKIA will use this as a hammer in negotiations to get the best 3G settlements possible from IDCC. We already know NOKIA is attempting to limit total 3G licensing revenue to 5%. We also know that IDCC and NOKIA do not agree on this point.
One last point, some posters need to understand and appreciate the rise we have had since Jan 1st.
Jan-02-03 14.65 15.73 14.60 15.70 474,500 15.70
Almost 10 points or 65% increase. If I were to tell you that I had an investment opportunity that would yield 65% in 6 months you would be extremely happy.
My point is that we should all be careful not to fall into the bubble mentality of the late 90's. I've changed my philosophy dramatically and use revenue vs. shares model when I evaluate an investment. IDCC is fairly priced versus revenue that is being earned. When NOKIA hits the price will rise to adjust for that revenue
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
