DannyD re selling based upon assessment of management
Good post overall. However, I will take issue with a couple of your comments in the last paragraph when you said:
..."The issue it seems to me is whether you can trust your judgement of IDCC management enough to take appropriate action. I don't agree with AMS's conclusions about IDCC's management but I very much respect that he has enough confidence in his judgement to sell all of his holdings if he hears the "same BS" in the CC on Tuesday. Others have expressed similar views about IDCC management as vocally if not more so than AMS but get offended when it is suggested that they should trust their judgement and sell. Those that are hanging their hats on IDCC management getting religion if #2 is voted down, and/or management is flooded with critical e-mails, and/or strong anti-management views are expressed at the ASM, and/or etc. are kidding themselves IMO.”
First a sell decision should not always be based on one factor, such as one’s judgment of management’s abilities and capabilities. That is certainly important, but in IDCC’s case can be easily overridden by another very important consideration, such as the technology itself. Has IDCC’s engineers really produced essential technology for all the various 2G, 2.5G, 3G and 802 wireless standards? Will IDCC receive royalties/fees on every wireless device produced, as they legally should if the preceding question is answered yes?
Therefore, my decision to sell will be based not upon my assessment of management, but upon my assessment of the underlying technology. If I lose faith in IDCC’s technology, then I will sell in a heartbeat. I still believe that if IDCC really has the technology, and I still think they do, then they can be highly successful in spite of and not necessarily because of management. BTW I do think we have an excellent manager in DR. Brianconn over the technology area. I have also heard some good things about Merritt, Lemmo, and Kiernan. However, I am reserving my personal judgment on Merritt until I begin seeing significant new/updated licensing activity at IDCC.
I also take issue with your concluding sentence re kidding ourselves about IDCC’s management getting “religion” through shareholder efforts. Spiritual religion occurs when a sinner is confronted with and convicted of their sin, to the point that they will repent and change their sinful ways. There can not be a change until confrontation and conviction occur. Some people will be convicted upon confrontation and then change accordingly, regretably some will not.
I think the spiritual concept of religion in a sense applies to the situation currently at hand with IDCC and shareholder activism efforts. If top management is not operating in a true fiduciary manner in upholding the shareholders’ best interests, then they need to be confronted and hopefully convinced of the need to change. This confrontation can be done through phone calls, emails, proxy opposition/ vote, future shareholder proposals, etc.
I think some “religion” has occurred and some needed changes were actually made by IDCC’s management. Option grants were much less in 2002 than in 2001. Bonuses to the top five executives were reduced in 2002. There appears to be somewhat better disclosures as evidenced by the fourth quarter 10Q, the 10K, and the Ericy resolution CC. However, the request for more options at this time was wrong in the opinion of many, and needs to be vigorously confronted and soundly defeated by the shareholders. They still need some more “religion” in this shareholder dilution matter.
Off to church for me for some "true religion". Happy Lord's Day to all.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
