Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 2:44 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 1 hr 16 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Parkervision Inc. Message Board

  • steveharris647 steveharris647 Apr 26, 2013 12:12 PM Flag

    QCOM 10-Q discloses PRKR lawsuit in Legal Proceedings Section

    This suit is one of just 7 disclosed in the Q. The auditors outsource this disclosure section to the relevant attorneys, who must opine whether the lawsuit is frivolous or has merit, and if does have merit, whether damages would likely equal or exceed 10% of working capital. If so, the suit is disclosed to shareholders. In the 6 months since QCOM initially disclosed the suit, Cravaith has concluded the liklihood of loss remains significant/realistic, and the cost could meet/exceed $1.2 billion (10% of 3/31/13 working capital).

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I'm looking at the 10-Q and can't find Parkervision anywhere, please tell me which page of the 10-Q provides this. I am long PRKR and this would help alot.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • I love how the paid pumpers, OB (aka rounder, aka Todd Parker who is the PRKR CEO Jeff Parker's brother) trub and littleP, try to spin the QCOM 10-Q disclosure as good news. The term possible BUT NOT PROBABLE is pretty self explanatory unless you have a hidden agenda (to pump stock).

      A simple google search reveals the following 10-Q statements from other companies that should help clarify for those with wild imaginations (and agendas):

      "We believe that an unfavorable final outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, and therefore, no reserve has been recorded for this potential loss."

      "The Company does not accrue for contingent losses that, in the judgment of the Company, are considered to be reasonably possible but not probable."

      These facts and opinions are my own...

      • 3 Replies to mrpvnotes
      • You idiot - I am not Todd Parker or anyone other than who I represented myself to be. I have also repeatedly explained why I post on this Board - because I have a lot of my money invested in this stock. I have not posted - like you - for over the last 6 years repeatedly bashing Parkervision without exception. Oh- yeah - by the way, your prediction that Qualcomm clearly won the Markman ruling was absolutely prescient. We should call you "Mr. 43 to 1"

        And yes - the inclusion of the Parkervision suit is good news because it represents the considered opinion of Qualcomm's management - in consultation with trial counsel - that a recovery in the Parkervision suit is possible, and that if there is a verdict, it would be quite substantial. Most of the pending lawsuits against Qualcomm are not listed in the 10-K because they do not meet those requirements.

        I predict that before this story is over there will be proof that you are being compensated by Qualcomm, a hedge fund, an investor or other related entity for purposes of bashing Parkervision. No one does what you do - posting misleading lies and blatant sophistry - for so long - aince 2005 - at such length - almost all day long - without having an ulterior motive. And let's ask - have you been in contact with anyone on behalf of Qualcomm - either before or after this lawsuit was filed? (Remember, there's discovery out there)

        And when you are done - go back to shredding evidence

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • It is interesting that you think OB and Rounder/Todd are the same person because I have felt the same way for some time. The similarity in style, substance,frequency and other aspects of his posts led me to that conclusion. He has also made posting mistakes that call into question his "I'm just a country lawyer" mantra. Rounder, BTW has also made several posts that virtually guarantee that if he is not Todd he is certainly someone inside the company.

      • Mike Farmwald:

        I am not paid by anyone to post here. I am a small investor who is here to learn and for a modicum of entertainment. Nor have I induced any publications to publish my nonsense (I have none) as gospel. I have never corresponded with Jeff Parker, though I did send him a couple of emails some years ago, and they were promptly referred to the appropriate investor relations people.

        If you were to ask Jeff Parker if he ever has corresponded with me, he probably could not answer, as he likely has no idea who I am.

        Sorry to disappoint you.

    • Possible, but "not probable"?

4.20+0.04(+0.96%)2:42 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.