Replies to post #22341 on InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[loophole73]

Bluesky

What was your expectation for past usage by Ericy? Further, How can you say that people around here gave up on the earnings capabilities of 2g? They had absolutely no say whatsoever in the outcome. I was not happy with the past usage figure or the licensing rate going forward, but I also did not have a say in the decision. That is just the roll of the dice.

Further, I have gotten over it. Just because I do not see the issuance of 5 mil additional shares to management at this time as being beneficial for the common shareholders or for the operation of the business plan does not mean that I have not given the matter a lot of thought.

The company did not mention anything about FASB schemes or tax advantages. Further, the company did not list any reasons for the issuance of additional shares. In fact, the information provided by the company tends to reveal a lack of real necessity for the issuance at this time.

You are entitled to have a differing opinion and we both are entitled to vote on the proposal. Regardless of the result, IDCC will be open for business.

MO
loop

[vtem]

Blueskywaves,

With all due respect,I strongly disagree with your opinion that dilutions won't affect confidence and in turn affecting stock price especially in this post-bubble market, in fact it should implicated otherwise.

The previous plans were sold on the premise that they were for a ten year period, mgmt didn't sprout a single word for its purpose before ( if indeed they have a better reason for it other than taking it for granted as usual ).

I would venture to say the least shareholders of this little company already given away ( if you refer, rewarded ) a merely 38% of there equity to the benefit of the employees,I suppose as a job well done.

I also want to remind all fellow shareholders here that this little company costs of doing business are 90% paying salaries and that accounts for all those hundreds of millions of license revenue we so dearly needed over the years.

They want to come back for more? Reasonable mind says NO Please!

[mickeybritt]

Blueskywaves

Let me set you straight on what I think and believe. First I think we got screwed on the Ericsson settlement, but regardless the settlement is supposed to validate the ownership of the patents and therefore the ability to collect on them from all infringers. Second this is technology already developed so no cost is fixed to it other than our sorry lawyers getting the license agreements. Third does these words ring familiar to you ENGINE AND TRANSMISSION, remember IDCC has the engine and tranmission for 3G and all must go through IDCC, not my words but Mr. Goldberg's words. Therefore the collectibility for 3G is on patents already completed. Fourth there is some work still left for 3G but as far as royalty goes it appears that IDCC already has what they need to collect for 3G or the engine and tranmission comment was out and out right lies, and the engineers should be working on 4G, which will have robots dressing us and going to the bathroom for us. Fifth what in the world does IDCC need money for if they have this bonanza of money coming in? Sixth in the event options are allowed, I suggest that they must be exercised and then restricted for another 2 years, that way they would at least be out and out right owners of the stock and have 2 years to sweat it out just like the ordinary shareholder does, and not allowed to write calls or puts against those options either. I think a guaranteed profit on exercise date is criminal, especially when IDCC in my opinion doesn't need a penny if they have what they presently say they have, and that is not what Mickey Britt says they have but what IDCC says.

Mickey

[EconEli]

bluesky you are dead wrong, but nice try.

Again, the issue is how IDCC can take advantage of the interim period B-E-F-O-R-E the accounting rule change in early 2004. Assuming IDCC issues all 10M shares, for example, at an exercise price of $22, they stand to generate an extra $220M in cash without running it through their income statement. That's like a secondary offering.

No, again the issue is should we shareholders allow IDCC to take advantage of us. Your assumtions of 10M shares bringing in $220M as a "secondary offering" are uninformed at best, and beside the point. The point is, why should SHAREHOLDERS allow IDCC to stuff a total of nearly 40% dilution down our throats, when every conceivable reason for doing so has already been taken care of ("$9 in cash" etc).

Also, your logic that it is OK for any company to do something they know will not be allowed next year is astounding. The implication is that your type of thinking is a huge part of the reason why this economy has been in so much pain for the last few years.