Per Hayes, the "Total Addressable Market Value", or in other words, revenue related to this package of patents bought by Spherix, JUST FOR 2013, was estimated by Rockstar to be at............. $20 BILLION, with a "B".
That's just the year of 2013!
For those who are excited about a $1.10/share offer. You must be short term traders who bought at .75 and are hoping to sell at 2 or 3, unless you think:
-there really is no value in these patents?
And as for the term "Patent Trolls"
Yes it seems some of the things going on in this area are be taken to an extreme.
But as Anthony said, in the case of a Nortel, these patents are basically the only way the creditors can hope to regain value on their Nortel receivables, and in this case, $4.5 Billion generated. The US Govt isn't going to let that go away.
I have no problem with Spheris's disclosure practice on news.
There's a video out there where he talks about his heavy responsibility as a CEO of a public company.
I follow his Twitter
I do believe they will issue key info when called for. He's seems to be a sharp, thoughtful guy.
The flip-side is he issues info all the time and gets accused of hype.
Don't look for him to be your crystal ball, because he can't....... by the law.
Either you take your best shot and it pays off, or it doesn't. That's the Market for us average retail investors.
He's not out there dumping his stock every chance like some other CEO's and Mgmt teams.
I view it similar to this:
Hard working, high achieving athletes don't broadcast all the work they're putting in.
They understand it will show when gametime comes.
I'm just not going to worry about this stuff
I'm going to believe that Anthony Hayes is too good and too experienced to step into this :
1. Thinking this was going to be quick easy money. Otherwise Rockstar would have pursued and wrapped it up rather than selling this portfolio
2. Without a plan for funding or alternatives, if needed, that is not already thought out.
Disagree, there's nothing to sell, 150k revenue last Qtr, and they haven't been able to monetize anything of any value.
Would you by this company, and if so, why? How many shares are you invested with?
Long ago, yes I would say excitement and almost hysteria
-reasonableness for the most part by a few who have continued to hold
-a few diehard bashers still around and gloating at the lowest of lows
My opinion...Just games played with technicals. Otherwise someone's going to jail.
And after a 7 day 35-40% pullback.
I think there's just not as much to gain here……at .75 to .85 cents? To what extent does the gain offset the risk here? I don't know what upside there is, but from where this was to where it is now? Shorts still here are late to the party, or just not very good.
Whether or not it goes to the pink sheets will depend on upcoming binary events…so we'll see?
But it looks like the chances are not very good with you here
Love the honesty…Ur not alone!!!
Maybe a NE win will change everything!
Complacent, Satisfied, and very very Comfy financially when they go home at night cuz no matter what, they have nice paychecks to cash, nice bonuses awarded to themselves, and stock to 10b5-1 any time they like.
The thing I wonder is in most cases, aren't bonuses and stock awards performance based???
But I think you're the one actually missing the point.
A major piece of researching companies for investment is considering the management team. How many people here actually considered the management independent of the hype? I would say zero because there is nothing about this management team that ever said this is a good investment here.
I think it can be said that universally, all investors here got involved because of the hype related to Google and dreams of $100/share when it only cost $3 to get in. And if just now getting involved? They're taking a flier because its only .50 cents a share. But there is still nothing about this management team that says this is a good credible investment. In fact, after these last 3 years, there couldn't be more red flags about getting involved with this company because of its management. There are still going to be investors tho because at .50/share, it might be worth a risk on that alone.
I consider this a lesson for future investing.
And as for analysts, they can be a source for understanding a history of events, but never get drawn in by any opinion or hype, and I think that applies to opinions up or down. They have no idea either
RPX agreed to take the shares to facilitate a resolution of UNNECESSARY and WASTEFUL litigation. "
Yeah, and what the hell does that mean?
Exactly what I said, still re-living the hysteria and gloating.
Since still here, you must be invested. What's your cover price?
Maybe we all can learn something from you.
Now do we understand what that means tho, or how it's done?
So if they were wanting Google to pay, as Vringo is looking for, they would be able to get them to do it without a long & drawn out court process?
A company is not going to agree to paying a license fee or royalty of any kind if they don't think they owe it
Sounds like a "kindler and gentler" IRS
But maybe their fee's are so miniscule it doesn't make it worth it to put up a fight of any kind?
If you haven't read yet, you probably should
Assuming these patents are what they've been represented to be, I believe that Hayes can out smart all these guys strategically and turn this into something nice (I know harizal you don't agree, and that's ok).
Croxall at MARA seems like a sharp guy, although his foundation doesn't necessarily scream Patent Expert, but he's gotta be recognized for what he's accomplished
"He has an MBA from Pepperdine University (1995) and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Purdue University (1991)."
You are right!!!
The question now is...where does it go from .70???
More for your money at .70 than at $4
Even better at 0.48 -0.50
Worked its way down slowly over that year and a half the whole time from a $27+ high with no solid news
Still no solid news, but it's holding .90 cents, thank you very much!