Loop what is your opinion of the 45 days and in addition the extension to Feb 9, 2009 for Luckern to issue his findings if the unthinkable happens? Why after 10 years of fighting and negotiations, would they need an additional 45 days to finalize this? I for one am very disappointed that they granted Sammy the additional month and a half plus the additional month on top of that before Luckern issues his report. This should have been able to be completed in a week, two tops IMO.
In my dealings with attorneys (which is very limited) they must have gone to the same class as accountants do that doesn't appear on a persons transcript. The focus of that class is "don't put off till tomorrow what you can postpone until the day after". No matter what the amount of time for a deadline, accountants and attorneys will take all the time granted to them to complete a project. If they would have said we will agree to a week stay, then both parties would have done all that is necessary to get the job done in a week. Giving them as much time as they have just delays things unnecessarily IMO.
Message In Reply To:
Mickey
I think all IDCCers are on the same page. They just want the street to react quicker. Many have Dec options and they obviously want the share price to rise post haste. This deal is going to happen, but guidance cannot occur until it closes. With various hedges via options and puts, someone is always going to be unhappy with any waiting period that goes past their options date. Some blame the company even though the company is doing the best it can. IDCC has kept Samsung's feet to the fire as much as the enforcement systems would allow. If for some reason Samsung pays and signs earlier during the 45 day period, but after December options friday, we will hear the squealing despite the watershed effect it will have over the rest of the sector holdouts.
MO
loop
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
