thelurker
I don't have a clue as to where the stock will trade short term, but first IDCC beat the street. Second they gave a nice forecast for Q2 revenues. Third the possibility of a Nokia settlement is closer than ever, and could happen any day or may not happen but the possibility is hard to overlook. Fourth other companies are still unlicensed and can license any day. Expenses are coming down and revenues growing and cash on hand with more coming in and possible buy back and possibly a dividend. I would think with the company guidance and the markets improving and talk of the recession getting better, one would think that bigger insitutions will begin making investments in IDCC.
IDCC is showing strength in recurring revenues, and now improvement in chip sales, with the possibility that even more chips could be utilized. The untapped computer indsutry hopefully will begin to get licensed for their wireless products.
I think the fact that Nokia and IDCC haven't settled shows that IDCC doesn't mind going the distance with Nokia, and seeking a lot higher rate than what just a few months ago they would have taken. This higher rate will be obtained in my opinion as I think they have Nokia, and Nokia can't and hasn't circumvented the IDCC technology. Unlike Samsung Nokia no longer has a MFL, unlike Samsung, Nokia told the whole world what rate a essential patent should be paid. If you can't work around it and have to have it then folks its essential. If Nokia is going to have to pay a higher rate does that not indicate the remaining unlicensed will pay a even higher rate than Nokia. The facts are all of the unlicensed could have stepped up and got a deal earlier but they waived that right and elected to not pay, and now when IDCC goes after them, they know they owe and they also know legal expenses can be pretty high, and when you know you owe and still are willing to risk sanctions legal fees and higher rates, it just makes sense to get a reasonable deal. In the whole scheme of things if you stop and think what company couldn't sell their phones if the price was a $1.00 a handset higher. What consumer says I wouldn't buy what I like because it cost a $1.00 more. Yes you might have a very few, but I think it would be so minimal that it would be meaningless. In fact I would think if they paid IDCC and factored that price in the product they more than likely would sell just about as many and actually make more money as I doubt the price would be the exact amount they paid IDCC but a higher increase in selling price.
I still go back to product sales as being very important to IDCC, and I am not a engineer but if the slimpchip or other IDCC product is needed for any company wouldn't it make sense that other companies would more than likely also start utilizing the chip.
JMO
Mickey
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
