InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

rmarchma

05/08/03 4:40 PM

#23717 RE: rmarchma #23716

Information about restricted stock and RSUs from the latest proxy as follows:

In connection with his service as Chairman of the Board of Directors during 2002, in 2003, Mr. Campagna was awarded 50,000 restricted stock units (“RSUs”). Such RSUs are generally forfeitable if Mr. Campagna ceases to serve as a director before the RSUs vest 2 years after their grant date, do not have voting rights, and are not deemed to be outstanding shares.(page 5)

In keeping with our philosophy to align the interests of executive officers with the interests of our shareholders, up to 30% of an executive officer’s bonus may be paid in shares of restricted stock. Generally, these shares are restricted as to transferability for a two-year period, but are not forfeitable. The shares have full voting power and the right to receive dividends. The Compensation Committee also provides additional cash compensation in the form of a tax gross-up to cover each executive officer’s tax liability associated with the restricted stock grant. (page 8)

From time to time, we issue stock options, restricted stock (i.e., shares of Common Stock having restrictions on transferability), and restricted stock units (i.e., nontransferable rights to acquire Common Stock) to executive officers, including the Chief Executive Officer, as long-term incentives. (page 9)

We have also issued restricted stock and restricted stock units as part of our compensation structure. In 1999, we issued to each executive officer then employed, including Mr. Goldberg, restricted stock that generally was non-transferable and was forfeitable if the recipient left the Company prior to the third anniversary of the grant. At that time, we also agreed to provide to each executive officer upon the lapse of the forfeiture risk on the restricted stock a tax gross-up benefit that would cover that executive’s tax liability associated with the restricted stock. In 2000, we replaced the tax gross-up benefit with a grant of restricted stock units that vested (i.e., converted to transferable Common Stock) on the same day that the forfeiture risk on the restricted stock lapsed. We have also issued restricted stock and restricted stock units as part of our compensation structure. In 1999, we issued to each executive officer then employed, including Mr. Goldberg, restricted stock that generally was non-transferable and was forfeitable if the recipient left the Company prior to the third anniversary of the grant. At that time, we also agreed to provide to each executive officer upon the lapse of the forfeiture risk on the restricted stock a tax gross-up benefit that would cover that executive’s tax liability associated with the restricted stock. In 2000, we replaced the tax gross-up benefit with a grant of restricted stock units that vested (i.e., converted to transferable Common Stock) on the same day that the forfeiture risk on the restricted stock lapsed. (Page 9)

(2) Does not include ownership of RSUs, which constitute rights to receive Common Stock under the Company’s 1999 Restricted Stock Plan at a future date. Such RSUs are generally forfeitable, do not have voting rights and are not deemed to be outstanding shares. The named beneficial owners owning RSUs as of April 7, 2003 are as follows: Mr. Campagna, 305,000; Mr. Clontz, 12,000; Mr. Colson, 6,000; and Mr. Roath, 32,000; together with all directors and executive officers as a group (15 persons), 355,000 RSUs. (page 17)

Restricted and Deferred Stock. The Committee is authorized to make Awards of restricted stock and deferred stock (including restricted stock units) under the 2000 Plan. Prior to the end of the restricted period, shares received as restricted stock may not be sold or disposed of by participants, and may be forfeited in the event of termination of employment in certain circumstances. The restricted period generally is established by the Committee. An Award of restricted stock entitles the participant to all of the rights of a shareholder of the Company, including the right to vote the shares and the right to receive any dividends thereon, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. Deferred stock gives participants the right to receive shares at the end of a specified deferral period, subject to forfeiture of the Award in the event of termination of employment under certain circumstances prior to the end of a specified restricted period (which need not be the same as the deferral period). Prior to settlement, deferred stock Awards carry no voting or dividend rights or other rights associated with stock ownership, but dividend equivalents may be paid on such deferred stock. (page 21)




icon url

dws

05/08/03 4:42 PM

#23718 RE: rmarchma #23716

Ronnie, In all due respect here for what you bring to this board, Harry drives the bus and if he keeps it in the direction we're heading, it's fine with me. Who are we to judge if he and other on the management team are overpaid? We know very little about the goings-on inside, which is certainly another hot-button topic.
I avoid the options and can afford to wait.
JMHO.
icon url

blueskywaves

05/08/03 7:01 PM

#23737 RE: rmarchma #23716

Please let’s never say again that Mr. Campagna does not get paid for his “part-time” work as Board Chairman of IDCC.” The words “excessive compensation” come to my mind regarding IDCC’s outside directors.

I dunno', Ronny. It's bad enough that you insist on using deeply flawed data to judge IDCC's executive compensation program but now you want to go after the board too!

More than 70% of the Fortune 500 have ONLY one person holding the titles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. Many people now believe that it is easier for a large corporation to have an independent board if the Chairmanship and the CEO positions are held by different people. IDCC is still a small company with a headcount of only 300, but yet you argue that the Chairmanship is only a part-time position. Clearly, IDCC is headed in the right direction with company tradition already of separating the Chairmanship and the CEO positions.

By the way, S&P 500 CEOs raked in $6.4B in total compensation last year when the S&P 500 tanked by 24%. That's an average compensation of $12.8M per CEO for negative shareholder value creation. The top CEO was Apple's Steve Jobs who raked in $90M in total compensation in 2002 while its stock dropped by 35%!

Again, you strain credulity when you say that IDCC's management is overpaid considering that they increased the stock by 50% in 2002 after increasing it by 79% in 2001. Do you know that ONLY 4 of the 75 technology companies in the S&P 500 generated positive returns in 2002????

http://www.thestreet.com/funds/stephenschurr/10085883.html

I understand you think that IDCC's compensation should be compared to other small tech stocks, but to this day you have have been unable to respond to my direct point that a more useful and honest basis for comparison is a basket of other companies with comparable licensing models because the litigation risks in a licensing model forces a company to pay higher compensation to compete effectively for managerial and technical talent in an open market characterized by the presence of a very large number of players who continue to use the options systems very aggressively to boost cash flow. As you know, IDCC had practically no access to the equity markets after the 1995 Motorola debacle.

Hey this is a free country. If you want to be known as a corporate gadfly with a penchant for questionable data, please feel free to go ahead. Be prepared, however, to be tuned out for being a flake.

BSWhy

P.S. I think restricted stock units are generally treated like restricted stock.