Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Davenport's report was worse than Barclay's. 

By: postyle in IDCC | Recommend this post (3)
Fri, 28 Oct 11 9:35 PM | 382 view(s)
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications 		Msg. 43481 of 48237
(This msg. is a reply to 43476 by bulldzr2)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

bulldzr, maybe it is just me - but it was very predictable of Skeels to write what he did. After being neutral (i.e., negative) for so long and missing the run from the low $20s to the $80s - he has been waiting for an opportunity to attempt to save face. By overly focusing on renewals and Nokia, he completely missed the growth of other licensees (like HTC) as well as the telegraphed explosion in wireless IP valuations.

It seems many in the industry think he is a good at analyzing the overall IP asset class, but it is hard to believe that he has much credibility left when it comes to IDCC's unique business.

You are right that his report was much more negative than the BC report. I just question the impact it might have on IDCC at this point in time, primarily based on the credibility of the analyst related to IDCC specifically. Just MHO.


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Davenport's report was worse than Barclay's.
By: bulldzr2 in IDCC
Fri, 28 Oct 11 9:02 PM 		Msg. 43476 of 48237

We might wish that the Barclay analyst had a better imagination but I reckon their typical institutional customers are more comfortable with an analyst like Joe (Just the Facts, Maam) Friday than Alex Kreskin. But the real damage was done by Davenport imo, who chose to add some negative editorial content to their objective analysis.

http://wirelessledger.com/Davenport_report_2011_10_27.pdf

« IDCC Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next