InvestorsHub Logo

mickeybritt

05/01/03 7:26 PM

#22286 RE: Corp_Buyer #22283

Corp Buyer

Not only are the officers of IDCC not going anywhere, you couldn't run them off with a stick. They are on that proverbial gravy train and have been for years. If the stock goes up well guess what that is O.K. but it does have a affect on getting cheaper options, so they haven't had a real incentive in the past to raise the stock price.
Hopefully the dollars start rolling in and the investors can see as good a return as the officers have been getting for years.

Mickey

Desert dweller

05/01/03 7:51 PM

#22291 RE: Corp_Buyer #22283

Corp, I hope all the pro unlimited option crowd over the next few weeks open their closed minds and re-read your excellent posts on the subject of options and management compensation. The pro unlimited option crowd obviously believes the big lie that has been going on in techland for the past few years that you will not be able to hire talented people without giving away investors wealth. Or the other lie that there is no cost to granting options. I know IDCC will not be in the forefront of the change that is necessary for our stock market to get back on its long term growth rate with its current management. I will be voting my shares no on 2 out of the 3 proposals just so management knows that there are many of us out here that are fed up with being their unlimited meal ticket.

In order for our stock market to get back on track one of the major mistakes of the past decade that must change is the almost unlimited use of stock options at companies who can afford to pay its management with cash. I have no problem with limited use of options but Wall Street and IDCC have gone way over the edge in terms of excessive use of options.

I have no problem at all with rewarding management.

I have no problem with management getting rich off of their efforts.


From the shares that have already been given to them, they will all stand to become multi millionaires for their efforts. Some have never sacrificed at all in the process. Using our CFO as an example, he came along after there was well over $80 million in the bank and has been rewarded with cash compensation very handsomely. I understand his position better than that of most other members of management having been in accounting since 1986. Now add to that the number of options he has received and he stands to become rich from being in the right place at the right time. He does not deserve another option nor do any other members of the management team. The fact that they choose to sell at times does not mean that we should give them more today. If they want more because they see the same potential that we do, let them do what we do, use their hard earned cash from salaries.

For those in management that actually took lower salaries in exchange for options during the period '95-'97, they were given options in exchange for that time period. There is no need to continue rewarding them today for the sacrifices made for those few years or to make the mistake of using that as a reason to give them more today.

Today all members of management are being paid at a minimum going market cash salaries and in most cases above market salaries for employment at a 300 person company. The only exception to this is Harry who knows a good thing when he can take it. He refuses to take a payment for his services as board chairman, which is supposed to be a part time position, and instead takes shares of stock, not options. Last year we gave him 50,000 shares, or the equivalent of $1,000,000 for part time employment. This level of compensation must stop.

freegem

05/02/03 1:30 PM

#22429 RE: Corp_Buyer #22283

Corp_Buyer: How will Institutional holders vote?

Thank you for making this effort. I will vote no on
proposition 2 and so will many others. But what about
intitutional holders of IDCC stock. How can we ask them
to vote NO along with us, or do they care at all. It will be
very nice if can send a strong signal to the managment.
Does anyone have an idea?

FA