SI
SI
discoversearch

 Technology Stocks | Interdigital Communication(IDCC)


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: nicmar who wrote (5133)12/17/2011 2:45:16 AM
From: CB02SD
   of 5185
 
Nicmar, I rarely play options myself, so not the person to say anything good or bad. However as you mentioned, lesson learned, most likely a different lesson had they come in. They have their place, debatable if this is the best company too place them with. The long pauses between action being a negative for that. Then again that should be judged by the people who use.

If you have been a longterm holder than you have already received at least a partial win. Up 800 percent for the last decade.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: CB02SD who wrote (5134)12/17/2011 11:57:46 AM
From: nicmar
   of 5185
 
CB. Basically, I would like to see a final resolution as to whether IDCC will be sold or remain some form of an independent entity because it will free up some funds that I would love to invest in other depressed stocks. IDCC has a habit of keeping investors overloaded with stock in the company as there's always the promise of the years long resolution with nokia or some other infringement law suit. Addictive, IDCC is, but ya gotta love the process and stay with it. Oh well, just musing CB. mo.. nic

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: nicmar who wrote (5135)12/17/2011 2:05:50 PM
From: CB02SD
   of 5185
 
Nicmar, Yes, absolutely agree with your “basically”. One always prefers to have a charity with their investment along with a solid footing in where the company is going. This S/A is a complete unknown. i.e. are they going to sell out, are they going to merge, are they going private, is everything going to back to what was, and so on .

As to overloading on this one due to potential positives in play. Sure, over the last 10 years or so it’s been the driving force. What could be. From Baby Qcom, to the company bragging on the need for a bigger calculator and hockey sticks ,essential patents {they believe they have} and so on was all based on what could be. The potential of getting paid on all that the company claimed infringed at the proper rate for the I/P.

But it does take two to tango, and of our selected dance partners we courted to dance, well they have a different view as to our worthiness. I guess were more of a wall flower in that regard, in some cases anyway.

Nokia, can you believe it is still going on with them, Mot, guess was a free pass, unknown reason, LG to me was more of a 5 year lump sum payout vs. a license based off any sales/ or past sales. Best to avoid yet another court case. Didn’t follow sales and once the yearly payments were complete. No LG. Sure you can mention they may have been in talks, a person could and should mention be been in talks with everybody, and if not why not, in any event the talks failed and off to court we went. Think it was 10/3 we added them in with the others from the latest. Then there is Apple, BTW I’m a long time apple shareholder, I have no idea with all the sales they have that Idcc is getting what they are, wait a minute here, to be fair IDCC was having some license issues / revenue issues at the time and possibly sweetheart deal was made, I suppose, and if so you get what you can get.

I guess on the overall I’m saying all the talk with the potential has a huge disconnect with the reality. It is surprising they did as well as they have in regarding to S/P considering the court issues and delays.

Or perhaps another way to view under the current, the blue sky talked about is in reality a dark and cloudy view without sign of any solid footing. Be that as it may, there really is potential, and the past ten years has not been bad, but they do need a few breaks in the courts to go from here. 4G cannot play out like 3. That is if there isn’t a outright sale.

JMO

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: CB02SD who wrote (5136)12/18/2011 7:00:53 PM
From: nicmar
   of 5185
 
A few things to consider.

1. IDCC gets bought out for $80 plus which relates to nortel.. $100. Personally, I can't see IDCC selling out for less than nortel as bankrupt nortel didn't have ongoing r&d to go along with the sale. If IDCC can't get $120, then no sale, yet can IDCC get an initial bid for $60?

2. IDCC hooks up with another company that has some expertise with licensing. Even WI-lan has a license with nokia and apple.

3. IDCC goes back to business as usual. Hopefully with a plan that has the possibility of licensing the major telecom companies.

4. IDCC loses the cafc. No sale and IDCC drops SA. Sammy decides to non renew. eps plummets and goes to 10 supporting a S/P in the TEENS.

Best to take option 1, be it $60 or $120. Confusion abounds for lack of company information or guidance. mo.. nic

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


From: nicmar12/18/2011 10:27:29 PM
   of 5185
 
Some posters on ihub feel we will get a premarket announcement tomorrow. Another false start? .. nic

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: nicmar who wrote (5138)12/18/2011 10:34:49 PM
From: slacker711
   of 5185
 
If I was going to bet on a date, it would be the day after options expiration.

Slacker

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: slacker711 who wrote (5139)12/18/2011 10:44:23 PM
From: nicmar
   of 5185
 
Well slacker, you're most likely right. Good call. I'm not going to say anything about my ton of dec options that are spent and I'll snuggle up to my long shares. Btw, hope you're right slacker. Sometimes it's good to take a nugget instead of holding for the whole mother load. No? mo.. nic

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: nicmar12/19/2011 9:53:02 PM
   of 5185
 
Arbiter delays ruling on Kodak’s patent claim against Apple and RIM
Monday, December 19, 2011 · 3:39 pm · 1 Comment

“A U.S. arbiter for trade disputes is delaying a decision on Eastman Kodak Co.’s high-stakes patent-infringement claim against smartphone makers Apple Inc. and Research in Motion Ltd.,” The Associated Press reports.
An administrative judge overseeing the dispute at the U.S. International Trade Commission has set a new target date of Sept. 21, 2012, for deciding the case,” AP reports. “The nine-month extension will allow the judge to examine new expert testimony from Canadian BlackBerry maker RIM and address legal issues raised by Kodak.”

AP reports, “A favorable ruling could enable Kodak to receive up to $1 billion in fees.”

MacDailyNews Take: As currently constituted, will RIM even be here to pay in 9 months? And, for that matter, will Kodak be here to collect?

http://macdailynews.com/2011/12/19/arbiter-delays-ruling-on-kodaks-patent-claim-against-apple-and-rim/

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: nicmar12/19/2011 10:03:06 PM
   of 5185
 
Apple wins ban of HTC Android devices at US International Trade Commission By Nilay Patelon December 19, 2011 05:06 pm







The United States International Trade Commission just ruled in favor of Apple in its case against HTC and banned the importation and sale of HTC Android devices including the Sprint Evo 4G, Verizon Droid Incredible, AT&T Aria, and T-Mobile G2. After a lengthy review, the Commission found that HTC devices infringe two claims of patent #5,946,647 — ultimately implicating the heart of Android itself and not HTC's specific implementation. The patent issued in 1999 and, in general terms, covers a device that scans computer text for data, like a phone number, and turns that number into a link that the user can then select to perform an act, like calling the number. The requirements and language of the patent claims are obviously more complicated, but that's a decent overview of what's covered. The ITC decision now goes to the desk of the president, who has 60 days to issue a rarely-used veto; the ban itself will go into effect on April 19, 2012 to provide HTC with a transition period, and HTC will be allowed to import refurbished products for warranty replacement purposes until December 19, 2013.

It's important to note that the ITC issued an exclusion order and not a cease and desist; HTC's current products already on US shelves will be unaffected. However, exclusion orders are generally broadly worded and aren't limited to any specific products — so we would expect Apple to use this ruling to go after all HTC phones running Android, from Android version 1.5 all the way up to and including version 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich).

It's a significant victory for Apple, especially since it can presumably now attack every other Android manufacturer with the same patent and its first favorable substantive ruling on the merits, but the ban may not ultimately have any real effect on consumers if HTC and Google can develop a patch that works around Apple's two specific claims. And indeed, that's what HTC is promising to do — here's the official statement we just received:

We are gratified that the commission affirmed the judge's determination on the ‘721 and ‘983 patents, and reversed its decision on the ‘263 patent and partially on the ‘647 patent. While disappointed that a finding of violation was still found on two claims of the ‘647 patent, we are well prepared for this decision, and our designers have created alternate solutions for the ‘647 patent.

Update: HTC just revised its statement on the case, saying that Apple's patent covers only a "small UI experience" and saying it will be completely removed from HTC phones "soon." We'll see how quickly that happens; any changes would have to first be deemed compatible with Android by Google and then approved and pushed to customers by HTC's carrier partners.

We are gratified that the Commission affirmed the judge's initial determination on the ‘721 and ‘983 patents, and reversed its decision on the ‘263 patent and partially on the ‘647 patent. We are very pleased with the determination and we respect it. However, the ‘647 patent is a small UI experience and HTC will completely remove it from all of our phones soon.

For its part, Apple is just repeating its previous statements on the case:

We think competition is healthy but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours.

We've asked for clarification on whether Apple will pursue further action against Android 2.3 and up; we'll let you know if we hear anything.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: nicmar who wrote (5137)12/19/2011 10:18:44 PM
From: CB02SD
1 Recommendation   of 5185
 
Nicmar, Valid points to consider. And you could also add more flavors in those 4 buckets.

Not sure what IDCC can get on an outright. I just don’t know. Your figures could very well be right on. I did wonder if Nortel may have gone for more than it should have, questionable.

Hook up, it would have to be the correct synergy. And I’m not sure what /who that could be as a “correct”. The people who are qualified to make that claim don’t post on boards, but board rooms.

Business as usual, no, they can try but no. Unless of course taking it private.

Your 4th is a bear. Tough, real tough. Yet is certainly could happen. Sam’s part in that one is down the road a bit, the Cafc, geez you think at some point they would release, thank god you didn’t add on across the board losses in the courts, I suppose a little too much there.

I’ll take option 2. A proper alignment with another company that fits perfectly into a new direction that can be funded by the company direct. There is money to be used there. Depending on who that might be could be the best choice.

But it’s all in the air now, we’ll have to see what comes down.

JMO

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.