I looked at Exhibit O and find it doesn’t really add anything substantial beyond the original McKool claims. The use of “we” in the text clearly shows PRKR as author. Thus, we have yet to see any QCOM offer, if there is one. The “smoking gun” has yet to appear.
Lots of interesting things are lining up.
For example, in the last conference call, someone asked Jeff for more information on the QCOM “offer” and he declined to provide it saying it would come out in later. Ponder that for a moment. QCOM knows everything about this. PRKR knows everything about this. Who is being kept in the dark? The investors.
And we have the Maxtak filings like their Doc 044 available on PVNotes
In it, Maxtak claims the following about the “$25 Million” deal with ITT from a few years ago. According to them: “No basis existed for the expectation of cumulative royalties of $25 million. ITT personnel familiar with the project were shocked by Parker’s Misstatement No. 23 because the $25 million figure had never been discussed. ITT’s VP of Business Development did not authorize PV to publicly disclose the $25 million figure. The PV/ITT relationship ultimately produced only $284,000 in revenue, all resulting from engineering consulting services PV provided to ITT during ITT’s exploratory work on d2p. “
Did JP just make it up? If true, it would not be surprising to me if it were part of a pattern that could extend to QCOM issue as well.
Then we have the raising of money before Markman. Why do this when a positive Markman result for PRKR would facilitate easier raising of money at higher per share prices?
Why raise money before Markman AND before the investor community is enlightened about any QCOM “offer”? Perhaps they privately realize that the facts surrounding each will have a negative impact on the stock price. Markman will come out well for QCOM and the due course revelation of “the offer” will reveal it to have little, if any, substance.
Trub, I think you are going to get that chance to buy at $1.50 that you’ve been looking for.
Meanwhile, QCOM doc 166 mentions over 4600 pages of prior art they have provided to PRKR.
Looking forward to reading more about that.
As always, the opinions are my own.
Given the current trading range, it made sense to raise money ahead of the Markman hearing. Even if ParkerVision were to prevail in court in the long run, it is conceivable that the Markman ruling might be perceived negatively by some in the market, causing the share price to drop. ParkerVision would then have no choice but to raise cash under adverse conditions. $2.30 is pretty good by recent standards.
Furthermore; in Contracts 101 students are taught that a contract vonsists of an OFFER and an ACCEPTANCE. Exhibit O is clearly, even to the lay person, it was prepared in responxe to an OFFER. No way on spinning this/
P/S/ Shorts coming out of the woodwork. Wonder whu/
Don't u think q, who has been engaging in a transparent public disparagement campaign vs pv, would have made public any contradicting evidence about the offer by now? And spare us the "opinions are your own" yet you are not short routine.
Exhibit O - as in defective "O" ring for the shorts. Wow....what a revelation. My dd was spot on. I was told: "Go long, stay long, don't worry about the short stuff on the board...just stay long" Exhibit O tells me why now. Ohhh boy!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
What do you guys see in Exhibit O? It is a document prepared by PRKR summarizing what they believed the qcom position to be years ago. The only thing truly notable about the document is the number of typographical and grammatical errors, which reduces its credibility. Importantly, nothing in that document shows what qcom's actual position was (putting aside the redacted royalty rates) - only what PRKR understood them (or wanted them) to be. Big difference. Not exactly admissible evidence!