A lot of staged stuff on CNBC. Most of the hosts on CNBC are not qualified to be speak thoughtfully about anything. For many (not all) they just read a script. It's just cable news journalism. The facts are plenty of engineers already clearly explained VHC patents during trial (that's why they keep winning) and Mr. Greenberg thinks it's "murky". Thanks Herb for that amazing analysis. CNBC comments are more murky than the actual court documents we read last night. 44 days and counting, Cisco up next.
The CNBC exchange between Greenberg and Kramer was comical. I can't believe the hubris people sometimes illustrate instead of just admitting they were wrong. Greenberg states that he is "unsure whether VHC will get a royalty or whether Apple will appeal." All the TV analyst are very smart but that does not necessarily make them knowledgeable. I have found that none of them know as much about a company that I follow closely. I presume they simply have too much volume to cover to really drill down on certain companies. However, they should close their "pie holes" and put their pride aside when they don't know what they are talking about, or have blown the call.
Greenberg certainly falls into this category- "CLOSE YOUR PIE HOLE." You were and are clearly wrong. VHC crushed Apple and Judge Davis (who has also never been overturned on appeal) affirmed the beat down. Apple will not be appealing this one. Davis ran such a tight ship throughout the trial that Apple really does not have any appealable issues. Brilliant VHC lawyering....
The real march has commenced. Mr. Larsen deserves much praise.