Well, the $30MM is nice, and the conciliatory noises along with the money are nice too. But I think the big fish in this kettle is Qualcomm, and they aren't real likely to settle. So unfortunately, the legal fees continue. I think.
Listened, also read the transcript. Sounded pretty good. First I heard of what the procedural ruling in the PTI litigation amounted to. Sounds to me like what it amounted to was the judge telling PTI that they were going to lose, and they'd better make the most of a last chance at mediation. But I'm not a lawyer.
Sounds like management is pretty determined to run the company rather than liquidate entirely. They see a lot of opportunity in high value areas of the device business.
Probably the biggest development was that a lot of analysts asked questions. They hope to get information, which is a huge improvement from previous management. The promise by management to be "as open as they can be" sort of trapped them with a gap between $120MM of expected recurring revenue and $180-200MM of expected revenue--they can't say how much is an estimate of episodic revenue and how much is expected new streams of recurring revenue. And since Tessera has requested damages of $300MM in the PTI matter and over $120MM from Amkor, it looks pretty confusing.
It is a great technology, but hard to reproduce without large yield loss. The MEMs actuator is also a little fragile for some applications. Still, it's very hard to beat it's ability to take great photos with the subject in motion as most VC cameras can't do now.
Or at least manufacturing stopped. Still a beautiful technology with a lot of promise, but there just doesn't seem to be a way to make money with it. I'd like to see what the stand-alone camera companies can do with the technology. There ought to be some way to give designers a chance to play with it assuring their employers that the outcome won't be something they have to pay a lot to Tessera to use. I admit it: the possibilities of fly-eye cameras (many images electronically combined) fascinate me.
I have found Mr Lacey's CCs generally encouraging. It seems like his permanent appointment is an owner-friendly development.
Of course, Mr Nothaft gave great CCs and the company got out of control during his tenure. I'd like to see the relative openness about legal matters continue, and a return of fairly regular boasting about the value of Tessera's products to the company web site. A dog-and-pony show every third year wouldn't be out of place either, and it would be appropriate soon. It would also be nice to see a rationalization of the division between 'root' Tessera and Invensas. (Actually, I'd like to see DOC spun off and Tessera renamed to Invensas, but anything that doesn't sort IP products by age would be an improvement).