spetty, I want to address some of what you posted on IV.
"...The patents are a nice wildcard and could provide substantially more upside than the mobile marketing business could if the cards fell right, but the fact is that Goodwin Procter have been a complete bust. It's been over a year and half since they were brought on board and what they've managed to do is not secure one major settlement, not be able to convince McMahon to allow Augme to pursue enough damages in the AOL/Tacoda case to even make it worth proceeding, apparently dropping the ball on the Yahoo! MSJ and failing so far to have any of the 636 patent challenges resolved in Augme's favor. Also from what I heard, Tom Scott was a disaster at the Pandora Markman hearing, and that thankfully AUGT had another attorney from Goodwin Procter who was also there representing them who did a good job, and if not for the other attorney, Augme would've been dead in the water. And while we're on the topic of the Pandora Markman, don't you think that Goodwin Procter should've gently reminded the judge that it's been like 9 months and we still haven't gotten a decision yet? I hope that we get some positive traction going with the patents, but with Goodwin Procter, Don Stoudt and IPCapital all working to try to monetize the patents, we've gotten zero results. If all of that expertise working together has been unable to monetize these patents, I simply have to wonder how much value they really have, because certainly no one is willing to pay to license them, probably because so far we've been unable to successfully defend them..."
The patents have always been a wildcard, and if anyone said they were a 'sure thing', then it was like saying something like "I'm going to kick so and so's #$%$!", it is usually a lot of bluster or misplaced confidence. Any rational thinking person knows there is significant chance that the courts (the real wild card) will just do whatever the hell they want to do regardless of merit. We have already seen that happen. But just the same, if you talk litigators about the chance for outcome, they will tell you that you can never predict it, so it could fall either way.
The contest with AOL/Tacoda was dropped because Mcmahon limited damages to tacoda, that meant they could not get anything, even if they won the case. Tacoda is an empty or non existent shell at this time, and at the time they were in operation, they did not produce enough to amount to much in damages today. A good example of the real wild card, the courts and lawyers, of which I mentioned. A great deal of profit accrued to AOL from the technology acquired by AOL/TW, and that should be plain to see, but she chose to see it otherwise.
I agree in general that GP has produced less than stellar results, and maybe that should really be reviewed by the company before proceeding. Just the same, It is never over until some heifer starts bellowing out 'take me to the river'.