Replies to post #240352 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[PUNKIN611]

NOK ripped Q's 5% 3G tariff in HALF at least. Oh they put out mombojumbo in there about NOK allowing QCOM use of NOK IPR's for the cut in rate but don't believe them. QCOM toke a BIG CUT in their customary rate. PUNKIN611

[JimLur]

Mickey you said, "I am not trying to trick or trap DataRox just think we should have some way of comparing the 2."

How about I put the same question on you and let you compare the 2?

Neither you or Rox could do so as Q has been quite public for many years stating their rate was 5% and IDCC has been claiming they get around $1.50 to $2.00 for any 3-G device. That's a big difference on how companys provide guidance.

The recent deal between QCOM/NOKIA has made many analysts think the rate has been cut in half but no details have been provided by either company.

Bottom line is to compare IDCC/Qualcomm IMO has no value.

The most important thing in comparing them is they are 1 and 2 regarding patents in this industry.

JMO

JimLur

[vtem01]

MB,

There is probably little doubt that IDCC is not recieving as much for CDMA2000 as for WCDMA. The goal of $2.00 per phone also not including fixed units/fixed fee/prepaid/volume discount, generally refers to WCDMA which IDCC has more patents contribution?

My 2 cents

[atsilives]

Mickey, I thought you were a man of the cloth
Yet your posts are full of venom and attacks.
instead of calling merrit a liar, and challenging other posters, why don't you do some research and find the answers for yourself.
$2.00 a phone. Didn't merrit say that was the top of the range rate ? That implies higher rates for smaller companies, and discounted rates for larger companies. Why would samsung pay 2 bucks a phone, or near the top of the range, when they are by far the biggest 3g company licensed. When you deal in large bulk, you get a discount.
and why can't you wait another 38 days or so until we find out the rate. for crying out loud, you and I have been waiting for years for this. wish i had a dime for every time i saw your "idcc is a screaming buy" on raging bull. you should be happy now. i have been one of idcc's biggest complainers for years, and even i am happy now. although that will change again if idcc takes another 2 years for their next large licensee.

[Data_Rox]

so mickey - I now remember that you didn't have a computer that allows you to see attachments or pdf's....so I will no longer point you to the information that allows you to do your own calculations.....but I think you would be tired of others always having to spoon feed you. Were you not able to see the images I pointed you to of the IDCC presentation either - is that why you didn't answer my questions?

So, what I pointed you to showed the following for Q in their FY08 which ended in September. It should be noted that I will use the assumption that 100% of the market (volume) is licensed even though Nokia only participated in a portion of the FY revenue, and there may be minor other players that do not participate in revenue.

QTL licensing revenue for FY08 was $2.77B
Device shipments for FY08 was ~462M units (CDMA and WCDMA)

= $6 per unit on an ASP of somewhere around $215 gives me an effective rate of around 3% based on the above for their FY08 in QTL. There may be some other offsets involved.

So I'm not a finance guy and may have some flaws in the above that others can correct, but that is what I see from my basic calculations.

In comparing IDCC to QCOM for you, the value companies get from Qualcomm's patent portfolio is significantly greater. This is not just my opinion, but that of the industry. Is it 3x, 4x, 5x, more greater? Much depends on the licensee.

Now, will you answer my questions? Or find someone to read to you the images I supplied from IDCC's presentation? Can you do similar calculations?