Let's take these one at a time:
"Just as an example, IDCC's current royalty rate of $0.42-$0.63 per handset is close to the $0.25-$0.50 handset royalty rate that I started using in late 1999 when people like Mickey were talking about billions and people like you were talking about IDCC's bankruptcy. You were WRONG!"
I never predicted IDCC's bankruptcy! Please show where I did! Furthermore, your $0.42-$0.63 per handset is just an estimation of the royalties on a very small percentage of all handsets sold. It doesn't tell the whole picture and it certainly doesn't mean that someday IDCC will collect that much from every handset as so many claim.
"Not surprisingly, institutional ownership in IDCC has increased to 30%-35% in early 2003 from less than 10%-15% in 1999. You were WRONG, again!
Blueskywaves, I never said institutional ownership wouldn't increase, it's not even an important metric to me. If you can show me where I said this I will bow down and worship you, LOL!
"It was really amusing to watch you keep on arguing futilely well into 2001 that IDCC's 1999 stellar stock performance was due to hype and manipulation when IDCC was merely riding on QCOM's coattails. The people like me who sold most of their stock in late 1999 and early 2000 understood this and never had any illusions about a stock with the weighty litigation risks of IDCC. Again, you were WRONG!
"
What? Are you saying the ride to $82/share was based on fundamentals? I would maintain that rise was based on hype and manipulation. Who are you trying to fool? I also sold most of my stock between late '99 and 2001, the last bit I sold last year. Please explain what made me wrong. I'm sitting on a pile of cash measured in the millions plus over a million in real-estate after having started out in the markets with a very modest sum. I'm not bragging, merely trying to figure what you are supporting your claims that I have been wrong with.
"Face it Bux, you have been consistently wrong in terms of IDCC's fundamentals. That's why you have very consistently and very publicly WRONG in terms of its stock performance."
I haven't been consistently wrong about any of that and you have failed to provide any evidence to the contrary. I've been amazingly correct and my phenomenal financial success supports that fact. Plus, my IDCC trading activity has netted me around $24,000 in pre-tax profits, not as good as some but enough to show that I haven't been consistently wrong about IDCC's stock performance. BTW, all those trades were on the long side during periods when I have publicly admitted I thought IDCC was more likely to go up than down. There have been a number of periods over the last 2 years that I have publicly posted I thought IDCC share prices were going to rise. So it's pretty hard to make the claims you have without appearing foolish.
"Lastly, if you were so spectacularly wrong about IDCC's ability to monetize its 2G patents then why should anybody believe your opinion about IDCC's 3G patents?"
What are you talking about? I specifically predicted the Ericsson settlement would be for "much less" than $100 million and I have been consistent in this prediction in everything I have written about it. I would say $34 million fits my predictions very well. I recall at one point narrowing it down to $30-$50 million but I can't find that post as RB doesn't have a search function. In any case, my more general predictions were far more accurate than 95% of the predictions here, yours included.
You really look foolish making all these claims about how wrong I've been without supplying any specific examples to back it up. And why do you always try to discredit the messenger instead of discussing the accuracy of the message itself?
Once
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
