Replies to post #119787 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[Texdraw]

loophole73 - I share your frustrations about the misinformation posted by some posters. My point is that the institutions need to take a closer look at idcc, then they should see that there is another significant investment opportunity in cdma. An award by the court to confirm what the arbs decided should raise awareness among industry peers and institutional investors. I think things are looking up, the selling by those who were disapointed that the stock did not soar after the arb decision is drying up. It appears ready to inch forward. I'm trying to be constructive, if someone can point out what patents that idcc has that qcom doesn't then that would be useful info. For example, I'm not technical but I think idcc is stronger in w cdma than qcom is.

[captainslog]

Loop -

If what I've posted is misinformation, then help me understnad why IDCC can't claim essential patents on their own Web site. Why can't the company publically, clearly and definitively state or otherwise represent to the public that they own essential patents in 2G and 3G. Why hide it?

I'm frustrated by my investment in IDCC. I'm also frustrated with myself. Some assumptions I've made about the company come from this board. I'm curious why the company itself can't answer some of these questions or more clearly and definately tell the story.

I would think that the compnay itself ought to be frustrated and angry and fighting mad. Let them speak to what they have. Let them use some of the money they have, some of the money that I've invested in the company to better tell their story.

In the life cycle of a company, IDCC seems stuck in a formative, legal stage. They haven't earned a place to tell their story, to brand their story, so to speak. Or they don't seem motivated to so. The status quo seems to work for some over there. Afterall, without moving the stock price, many have become multi millionaires. They win either way.

I'm willing to take this conversation offline, if there is something I am missing that can't be stated publically: [e-mail].