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: Is this going to be the start of another BEAR raid? 

By: zzfan in IDCC | Recommend this post (12)
Tue, 22 Nov 11 5:45 PM | 1321 view(s)
Boardmark this board | InterDigital Communications 		Msg. 43786 of 48237
(This msg. is a reply to 43783 by Mooseo1)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Mooseo

I think we should visit a few facts now and then to understand where we are and where we are going.

1. The BOD is studying strategic alternatives for maximizing shareholder value. These alternatives range from status quo to the sale of the company.

2. There is no time limit.

3. There is a self imposed silence at this time.

4. IDCC is seeking to enforce its IPR at the ITC against 4 of the largest OEM's in the world. The other 4 are presently under license.

5. The ITC complaint is timed to reach a decision at the end of 2012.

6. IDCC is not only presenting the teardowns of Nok, LG, Huawei and Zte terminals, they are including the teardowns of the basestations to define connectivity and rampups in the establishment of the pipes being created between the terminals on both ends for the transmission of voice and data.

7. The big boys have been backed into a corner regarding FRAND. In order to successfully argue that an injunction should not issue, it will ultimately come down to an additional assumption in the assumed license theory. This additional assumption must be that patent at issue is essential which means it is valid, enforceable and infringed by every OEM in the sector. They will be forced to admit in open court that the only items of controversy are the price and terms of payment because the term will be the length of the patent's life by definition.

8. Thus, 2012 may be a lean year or a monster depending upon the respondents in the 337 ITC investigation. IDCC has a new set of patents and a new set of trial attorneys that intend to paint the entire picture from terminal A through the basestation to terminal B and the relationship of the inventions throughout the process. The opponents are already nervous as evidenced by their motions to recuse the new trial lawyers.

9. If the potential buyers do not reach the number desired by the BOD, then no sale will occur.

10. If IDCC is successful in the new 337 ITC investigation and licensing occurs, the price to purchase the company will explode.

11. While we tend to get impatient, a show down will be happening within about a year that will dictate the future. IDCC may find themselves in a position to assist others in licensing for a third of the action along with their own royalty revenue.

12. Finally, FRAND rates come in two flavors. The first is without the necessity of litigation expense recoupment. The second is with litigation expense recoupment. It is an easy concept and can easily be presented to a jury with the use of a professorial looking expert and a blackboard with plenty of chalk or a fancy handout for their viewing and listening pleasure.

Any beartraps are being set to exploit the options trading. They certainly have nothing to do with the fundamentals and strategic alternatives of IDCC. I am half tempted to send these points to Evercore/Barclays, but I am not a proponent of shareholders butting in on the business of the BOD.

MO
zzfan


 - - - - -
View Replies (2) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Is this going to be the start of another BEAR raid?
By: Mooseo1 in IDCC
Tue, 22 Nov 11 4:05 PM 		Msg. 43783 of 48237

Deal Reporter 11/21 - 5:40pm


Courtesy of Sabatino on the Rambus Board


Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/36540774-1462-11e1-8367-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1eQs4WeRe


November 21, 2011 5:40 pm

InterDigital’s strategic review seen making limited progress

By Lori Silverman in Washington DC and Ed Mullane and Bhavna Kaul in New York


This article is provided to FT.com readers by dealReporter—a news service focused on providing insightful intelligence on event driven situations to investors. www.dealreporter.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

InterDigital’s (NASDAQ:IDCC) review of strategic alternatives remains quiet, three sources following the situation told dealReporter.

Shares of the intellectual property (IP) company jumped from around USD 45 to over USD 50 last week before settling down to around USD 48. On 14 November, Paulson & Co disclosed a 6.6% stake as of 30 September.

Despite the recent rally, a number of sources familiar with some of the parties who expressed interest in acquiring the company, said they have not heard of the process progressing.

In July, InterDigital announced it hired Evercore and Barclays to review strategic alternatives for the King of Prussia, Pennsylvania-based intellectual property company. Two months later in September, the company said it continued to explore a sale of all or parts of the company, but InterDigital has provided few other updates on the process.

One source said the process stalled over the past few months when the price expectations the company was demanding remained too high. A source following the situation in Asia also said that he had not heard of the process making any headway.

InterDigital declined to comment. This news service was unable to gauge the status of the talks with all potential suitors.

InterDigital may be awaiting a decision from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its case again Nokia before deciding what the next step will be in its strategic review process, said patent lawyers following the process. A decision is still pending from oral arguments heard on 13 January, in InterDigital v. International Trade Commission.

Buyers’ willingness to pay up for InterDigital’s intellectual property may come down to the infringement case. One patent attorney following the litigation argued that “one thing that puts buyers off is patent infringement litigation. Or, if InterDigital loses the infringement case, that can devalue the company”.

This patent attorney noted that if the Federal Circuit affirms the decision, and decides against InterDigital, existing licensees may find a path that would no longer require the payment of royalties under current licensing agreements, thereby lowering the valuation of the company.

“InterDigital needs to fight this to the end, otherwise they lose royalties on Nokia, in addition to royalties from other companies that license from InterDigital,” the attorney said. Many companies may have licensing agreements using the same patents in the litigation, he added.

One source close to a potential suitor said that a company typically puts its most valuable assets before a court. However, this source added these patents are not expected to change the level of interest in the asset. It has more to do with the valuation the company has placed on the assets and how encumbered these assets are, he said.

In September 2007, the ITC initiated an investigation in response to a complaint filed by InterDigital, alleging that Nokia had infringed by Nokia’s 3G WCDMA handsets.

In an initial ruling on 14 August 2009, an administrative law judge ruled that the patents were valid and enforceable but had not been infringed upon. The dispute worked its way up to the Federal Circuit.

Judge Pauline Newman, who is responsible for writing the decision and has a history of being very technical and thorough in her analysis before coming to a decision, is in her eleventh month of deliberation.

Additional reporting by Louise Bleakley in San Francisco and Tim LeeMaster in Hong Kong

MooseO Barf


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