The confusing thing for me is I don't understand why they agree to keep pushing dates forward when they have all these issues.
They need to dump some of the patents to raise funds or this thing is dead. Shareholders need something positive to spur buying or the downward spiral continues. Sad but true..
Well, this looks like a brilliant investment and hey Carl said so and that means it is.. Let's see, a few highlights - Book value -$6.22 per share, ROA -45%, operating cash flow -$16.5 million. Looks great Carl! And the sheep they follow. That's all it takes on fraud street.
From what I see, David James was just posting information which is factual. I don't consider that pumping the stock. The other dude's info is not factual.
Kasier Roll -- what is realistic about this statement? -
"T-Mobile --- same patent as AT&T, if they settle, will be just as good, $30K"
Does R2D2 know something we do not know? Do you think they settled for 30k? I'm guessing they did not, but we are all guessing. Catch my drift?
I never said it was great news. You must be confusing me with someone else. My only points here have been to convey that as bad as things seem, they are not terrible. They have assets and things can change quickly.
Therefore, given the circumstances, it makes perfect sense for them to sell some of these patents to raise money. I think this is a much better route than diluting the stock further.
If only we had the answers to these questions, but 360k per year x 3 is over a million per year and a company may pay 5 or 10 million, possibly more for the ownership of that patent.
Hmm.. are you sure selling some of the gazillion patents they own is bad news? I think that may actually be part of the business model genius.
Yes, but they also manipulate it back up once they get the cheap shares. I've been watching this for too long. The trick is to play the game along with them.
He was certainly of value in posting about the stock, but he was WRONG in some of his personal analysis and his views were the result of his emotional response to information. That's not to say he deserves any blame as everyone is responsible for their own stock moves. To say that something is a "home run' in his opinion and then turnaround and say SPEX has nothing positive for 2015 is extreme. He seems a bit bitter and that's understandable, but his messaging now is only negative and things are not quite as negative as he is proclaiming. In my opinion of course.
In the cases with Cisco and Juniper where willful infringement has been dismissed, can it be assumed by this ruling that both parties are therefore infringing on these patents? This actually may be good news and lead to settlements.
What happened to it's a "grand slam home run??" Now, it's " 2015 has nothing positive to offer Spherix."
I guess you can say your statements are "extreme?"
Umm.. this is an independent investment company's opinion. You have to pay for it just like any other independent report.
Yes, but that news should have been bigger in terms of the PPS and was not. In my opinion, the AT&T information was out there and this is why we didn't get the move one would expect from that news.
So, the question is what kind of settlement can be expected for the same patent in the Vtech and Uniden cases? It appears that the AT&T deal is some sort of licensing agreement and at best 30k per month.