JeffreeHF.....I object to you're implication that my point about relative valuation is overly simplistic.
First of all, we are still "learning" about the commercial value of IDCC's 3G patent portfolio. In rough terms, we are generating more than $3.00 per share in earnings through the licensing of about 50% of the market. That 50% apparently sees the value in the 3G portfolio. Another 30% (NOK), only through its rope-a-dope legal tactics, has avoided (so far) paying. IMO, IDCC has opted not to pursue the other 20% (most notably ERICY and MOT), because they will fall into place with a favorable outcome in the ITC action against NOK.
So, without even looking at LTE, which IMO will generate higher rates for IDCC, the successful licensing of "every 3G device" will produce well in excess of $5.00 per share in earnings; and, probably much more as the growth of the number of 3G devices (not just phones) accelerates.
IDCC's situation is a very fluid one, with many moving parts. For this reason, the above analysis IS a simplistic one, because it has to be.
My only point was that, all thing considered, for IDCC to have a market cap of 2% that of QCOM is unjustified. How and why it is this way is another discussion.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
