Replies to post #41259 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[0nceinalifetime]

That's a very good point:

"I’m not sure if heat from investors does much good with this company’s management."

Can you imagine telling a drug dealer that he is setting a bad example for children or a bank robber that he's making it hard for shareholders to realize a profit in the company that insures the banks or telling Yogi Bear that campers may go hungry if he steals their steak off the grill?

Guess what, that's not how this type of behavior is brought under control. The only answer is to get rid of the scoundrels. Once they have tasted the money you can't rehabilitate them.

Once

[sophist]

Rmarchma: I'm not really sure as to the point of your dragging up the "insider selling" and "excessive options" conundrum again. If Nokia had accepted the 2G rate set by terms of the Settlement and not asked for arbitration (which Management clearly expected to be the likeliest result), IDCC would be trading at twice or more the current share price. It could then be said that "insiders" were selling BELOW the ascending share price for almost the entire past year. And some might even think it was "wrong" not to have granted more "options" in June to fuel further acquisitions and rapid company growth.

Moreover, it appears that IDCC was following and not leading the general market and widespread industry practice in its "insider selling" and "options" practices, and unlike so many other companies with declining share price, IDCC was actually doing this with an increasing share price. I notice NO insider selling in the aftermath of our 2nd Quarter Financial report (yet), and if there continues to be none, I would ask you, what would you prefer, "insider selling" with continually increasing share price OR no "insider selling" with stagnant or declining share price?

In any case, IDCC is now stalled. I wonder if Nokia would have been so bold in its filing reference to "insider selling" if the recent options request had not failed. Did Nokia see this failure as a "vote of NO CONFIDENCE" and a possible vulnerability to exploit. This is pure speculation and only suggested here as a way of showing how little we know about the psychology and dynamics of company rivalry, tactics, and measures of "success" and "failure".