Replies to post #74358 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[amrwonderful]

sonic22: maybe there is no settlement with NOK, because NOK will not set a palatable 3G rate with IDCC. Maybe IDCC is willing to sacrifice a huge amount of 2G, for a 3G rate and upfront payment and NOK will not do it.

[dws]

sonic

Would you not call NEC a top-tier licensee?

I do not share your bad feeling. We'll get our due in 3G, why I am still long here.

We all have been speculating about settlements with NOK but none of us know if they are talking about 3G rates or anything else. I would assume Ericy is a named trigger, after they validated our 2G patents I would think they would validate our 3G patenets where IDCC has been much better at standardizing those patents. We go all the way to January 2005 without one top tier 3G license and I have a bad feeling were going to be in courts.

[jai]

Arbitration is for 2G, not 3G

Initially when the Nokia arbitration happened I thought that this was about 3G rates. Now I feel that this is just about money pure and simple.

Recently I've been attempting to project the potential in terms of dollar amounts if everyone signs 2005 and 2006. I do not have the expert knowledge of Ronnie so I asked him for some help. I've outline 26 major events that need to occur for IDCC to achieve its proper revenue stream. Using the UTMS handset model projections posted on this board I came up with this formula.

WCDMA handsets at 1%.

2005

$310 unit price times 1% = $3.10 per unit times 48 million units = $148 million in WCDMA handset revenue

2006

$250 unit price times 1% = $2.50 per unit times 90 million units = $225 million in WCDMA handset revenue.

The report has projections of 766 million units in 2005. Not sure if these are all 2G.

At .4% it would equate to $135 unit price times .4% = .54 cents per unit times 766 units = $413 million dollars.

In 2006 we have $135 unit price * .4% = .54 cents * 843 units = $455 million dollars.

So 2005 reveue using this model is $150 million + $413 million = $563 million.

2006 revenue is $225 million + $455 million = $680 million.

Nokia is selling mostly 2G handsets. They will pay more to IDCC form 2G than anyone else. IMO, the reason they are fighting tooth and nail is to save money. They know Motorola will not pay for 2G and they think they should not either.

If anyone can please help me in this model, I'd appreaciate it. I do not know how accurate these projections are or if the simplicity applies here.

[Learning2vest]

As long as we are talking about it gonna try to make another point about what respect is on an investment board. Some of us have what we consider to be "serious" money invested at InterDigital. Now, that might be 100 shares for some folks and 100,000 shares for others. Makes no difference IMO, the important thing is that we all respect this forum enough to read it, and to share our thoughts and feelings here about our IDCC investment.

I think showing respect in this investment forum is about WHAT is said about our IDCC investment as much as it is about HOW things are said. Not picking on sonic22 specifically, just that his ref post was handy to use as an example of what I'm trying to say(and I have done my best to answer a Friday afternoon back channel inquiry from him about another investment recently so we are cyber buddies).

Here is what I think was meant to be said in the first and last sentences of the ref post. Matt will let it pass as a good clean post under the rules, while I found it to be disrespectful of the fragile perspectives that allow some of us to remain fully invested here, and downright obscene!

"I agree with your assessment in regards the arbitration will not set a 3G rate and that is why right now I think IDCC is on the verge of greatness or long, long bitter lawsuits. (...snip.....) We go all the way to January 2005 without one top tier 3G license and I have a bad feeling were going to be in courts."

Given all that has been said here in the past, and the fact that this forum is a place for folks who are serious about their IDCC investment to share informed discussion, how can comments like that not be disrespectful? Do I just overlook it after it fired every involuntary kill instinct in my body? I'm typing this with hands that want to punch something.

I woke up this morning worried about having too much money invested in the stock market given the state of world affairs and our plans for some summer travel. In that frame of mind those remarks are offensive, cause hateful emotions that I cannot express here, and are not helpful. Wish I could just blast back what it caused me to feel and then forget it. But then I would be in jail.

Not making any excuses for anybody or condoning conduct outside the rules. Just saying that IMO there is stuff inside the rules that can be just as offensive. We all have our own set of doubts to deal with, and investing is a tough game even when we are feeling confident. Do we share those doubts expressed as reasoned opinions, or as doubts we need help dealing with? I think it makes a big difference.