Is it right for IDCC to remain quiet? Steph and Mr. Enrico both have valid points and I was agreeing with both of them.
Of course IDCC said from the beginning they wouldn't be communicating until the process was over. So they are just merely keeping their word. Maybe releasing info could potentially harm negotiations. These are fair points.
But surely there is some kind of middle ground. Clearly this silence will begin to cause stress and unrest among their shareholders. I mean we are talking months of silence. There has to be a way to encourage investors without tipping their hand.
Eastman Kodak is in a similar situation and this is what they relased to Reuters:
Kodak declined to provide a timeline for the sale or offer investors any details on the process. But it said it was "pleased with the progress and level of interest in the portfolios."
Such a release from IDCC seems reasonable, provide encouragement to shareholders, and not effect any negotiations.
Im not complaining, just getting a little restless. Any thoughts on why this seems unreasonable?
"I mean we are talking months of silence. There has to be a way to encourage investors without tipping their hand."
You are absolutely right, Familyfirst, but unfortunately you are bucking the corporate culture. Back in the days when InterDigital held earnings conference calls (they've cancelled two now) analysts used to beg Merritt for information about this or that licensee. He just wouldn't give then anything of value. The frustration of both analysts and large institutional stockholders was palpable, and the stock price suffered as a result.
Merritt just didn't care. He has never managed to improve the performance of the stock. His eyes are always on the long-term and doing what is best for the patent portfolio and (as he sees it) the future health of the Company. His bull-headed refusal to settle with Nokia when the administrative law judge at the ITC was begging him to do so is a case in point. And SURPRISE, we got an unsatisfactory, split the baby type of ruling out of the ITC and we are still appealing it two years later. You should have seen the stock tank the August that the ITC ruling came out! Merritt and all the stockholders had been assuming a win. Didn't phase Merritt.
So, everything you said in your thoughtful post about a little encouraging comment from management is absolutely appropriate and reasonable, but it isn't going to happen. They were mad as wet hens when they had to release a statement on the evening of September 26th after the misleading DealReporter story.
We are just going to have to hold grimly on. Management will tell us when they've got a deal and not a second before. Nothing fuzzy, IR friendly or conventional about this group (except our chairman Clontz) and they'll take as long as they think they need to take.
I won't be posting for a while (going to New England for the Williams-Amherst game) but I'll be checking the stock price twice an hour and thinking about you guys. Hold it steady and hold grimly on. We will be OK in the long run.
Good luck to all longs!
<<There has to be a way to encourage investors without tipping their hand.>>
It is neither an obligation nor an objective of corporate boards to "encourage investors." As a practical matter when you see a management or board that publicly pumps its shares, run the other way.
"It is neither an obligation nor an objective of corporate boards to "encourage investors." As a practical matter when you see a management or board that publicly pumps its shares, run the other way."
Lind- be careful. This statement you made could be viewed as bullish for IDCC.
I agree that there are ways and press releases to keep share holders encouraged and not upset the apple cart. However, when mgmt. is preoccupied with intense negotiations, it is possible not to think about these sorts of things. They do not do this types of activities often, may be only this one time.