Z, you clearly see where this is headed don't you? C'mon put the pieces together here and get real. You have an expired case of over a year now of, V vs G et al with it's many facets of court room antics and mistakes. You have several Federal Judges in Vringo's doing hand offs to each to complicate matters of accountability, and make it impossible for a trail to be established. It's so common in law where lawyers are setting up a case to discredit it using the failures along the way, and having no absolutes to point fingers at. It simply gets summed up as "not enough concrete evidence to rule in favor of" whoever. This is playing out perfectly for Google and now points to the delays as strategy by defendants that will ultimately save them from infringement. It only takes one Judge here to see one small difference between Vringo's patents and Google's W/A to end this.
Vringo really stands no chance and will never have their case recognized as case law with a win attached to it. Shareholders will soon regret owing VRNG and Wall Street is betting on it as well!
to use the system that runs Ad Words and Ad Sense but in the same sentence believes all software patents should be open game for everyone. The legal jockeying in all the government offices by hand picked government that Google once employed is securing that very outcome. I'm afraid Vringo, with all it's hired hands don't stand a chance on this stage.
simply use the exact method Google uses for Ad sense, or Ad Words? Remember they are showing great interest and support in case currently sitting in the hands of the Supreme Court. This case between
WildTangent Inc and Ultramercial Inc. has G, FB and several others bitting at the bit for a ruling. I just wonder if Google would be allowed to sue another search if they used their so called patented system of Ads revenue. If the SC rules that IP can no longer patent shared technology then Google should have no rights to protect what earns them exclusive rights to their 100s of billions a year. That's fair!
No, frankly I'm very comfortable reporting facts!
Ya right! This is a well planned maneuver and will serve as a reminder of America's falling moral boundaries, just watch and see. Vringo will most likely be the first candidate to receive a wakeup call that Google's design is more than colorable different and therefore not infringing. Want to bet?
Yes it was and served it's purpose, get investors trapped in VRNG so he could get out with profits. C'mon man where have you been, JA is long gone and moved on!
OH Boy, that's a laugh!
"Maintaining the confidence of investors is also very crucial."
Patent Monetization as new Business Model
Patent Monetization refers to an attempt to generate revenue by litigation for infringements, licensing agreements, or outright sales of patent portfolios. A number of companies had been using patent monetization in the past, using it as their only source of revenue.
Major income for Vringo comes from the development and distribution of mobile products & video applications. But the company’s actions in the year 2012 suggest that it is trying to diversify its business models.
As the part of this new strategy, Vringo merged with Innovate/Protect, Inc (I/P) in July 2012. Innovate/Protect, Inc brought with it I/P Engine, a fully owned subsidiary holding eight patents that were acquired from Lycos. After the merger Vringo emerged as a company with competencies in two sectors – Mobile Products and Intellectual Property. I/P legal helped Vringo to build an intellectual property portfolio that can be monetized in several ways.
Monetizing intellectual property portfolio requires a company to have specific capabilities to be successful. Some requirements are:
1.Strong Growth Strategies
2.Resourceful Legal Team
5.Capital for long Legal Battles
6.Research and Development for new Patents
In order to be successful with the new business model, Vringo will have the challenge to adapt and develop demanding capabilities. Moreover a strong leadership team is required to keep track of long term strategies and implement them. Success is not always guaranteed in a legal battle and a strong team is required for driving the battle. Maintaining the confidence of investors is also very crucial. In order to be successful in the long run, the company must develop intellectual property assets which contain key claims that can be used in infringement cases against other companies. These challenges serve as threats to the very existence of Vringo.
None if I do proper DD!
When you can prove to me that Google infringes Lang's patents and a Federal Judge actually agrees then maybe we can talk. Verdicts are overturned every day and last time I checked JJ, the presiding Judge has yet to be convinced of infringement. My gosh, we can't even determine if a RR is deemed necessary because JJ has obvious doubts about infringement. Keep buying though that's the popular vote!
at time of conference. "We feel our work around product does not infringe dating back to 2012 and therefore cannot offer plaintiff any monies"! If the judge can't resolve the matter it moves on to a later date.
Up until then they are supposed to try and negotiate which Vringo already announced in Doc #1060 couldn't be resolved. What will change, nothing.
Judge Leonard has no authority to rule on work around and will wipe hands clean of case. Then back to Judge Jackson who cannot rule unless a RR% is determined . Then back we go to experts and proof by Vringo it still infringes with the new experts. By then it's Christmas 2014 and Vringo is below $1.00 w/o something positive. Google however is now at $1200.00 and forces Vringo to take the 200M or else!
SAD DAY FOR VRNG INVESTORS!
Now Vringo want 1.5 billion because Lang is on BOD at Vringo of who bought the patents again. The same question arises, what business model?
Fast forward: Ken Lang starts a company called WiseWire. I was incredibly skeptical. I read through what the company is about. “No way,” I think to myself, “that this is going to make any money”.
1998: Ken files a patent that classified how search results and ad results are sorted based on the number of click-thrus an ad gets. He sells the company to Lycos for $40 million. Ken Lang becomes CTO of Lycos and they take over his patents.
$40 million! What? And then Lycos stock skyrockets up. I can’t believe it. I’m happy for my friend but also incredibly jealous although later in 1998 I sell my first company as well. Still, I wanted to be the only one I knew who made money. I didn’t think it was fun when other people I knew made money. And, anyway, weren’t search engines dead? I mean,what was even the business model?
Trivia Q for the VRNG holers: How many times could Google buy the entire company of Vringo with their current market cap?
How many times will they offer to settle?
Answer: ZERO (0)
Here's a better title for you..
Just trying to help you know!
Back to $2.95! MM are not going to let it go w/o news. The news coming won't be enough to move + $0.25 if that, then right back down. If news is bad the - $.0.75 fast! Traders already know what to do.
With the above groundwork laid, let me try to explain how market makers get short even if they like the Company;
Lets say that a stock (shell) has been lying quietly at $.25 bid $.50 offered. A limit order comes into one of the MM's
to Buy at $.50 for a thousand shares. Prior to this trade that MM may be "flat" (neither long or short any shares). He
fills the order and is now short 1,000 shares. He may raise his bid hoping to find a seller to "flatten" out his position.
But before he realizes it a wave of buyers have come in and cleared out all the $.50 offers. Now the stock is $.50 bid
.75 offered. Here comes that "Big" firm he just sold the 1,000 shares to at .50 with another bid for 1000 at .75. He
makes this print. Now he is short 2,000 at an average of .625. The market keeps moving and now its .75 bid 1.00
offered. Now he has to make a decision.
Just like investors, MM Hate to take a loss. So 9 times out of 10 he will now sell 2000 at 1.00 making him short 4000
but with an average .81. At this time he would love to see a seller at .75 so he can cover his short and make a few
But instead the market keeps moving up. Now it is 1.00 to 1.25 and here comes the buyer again at 1.25. He doesn't
want to lose the call so now he needs to sell 4,000 at 1.25 to keep his break even point above the bid. Now he is
short 8,000. Market moves up to 1.25 bid 1.50 offer here comes the buyer now he feels he must sell 8000 here
because "stocks don't go up forever".
Now he is short 16,000. And so on and so on. If the stock keeps moving up, before he realizes it he could be short
50k or 100k shares (depending how big his bank is). _________________________
Finally the market closes for the day and on paper he may look all right in that his "break even" price may be around
the closing price. But now he has to figure out how to entice sellers so he can cover this short. It is important to
note that if this happened to one MM it has probably happened to most all of them.
Some ways MM's entice sellers; Run the stock up with a "tight spread" in a fast market, then "open" up the spread to
slow down the buying interest. After it has "cooled off" for a little while lower the offer below the last trade right
after a small piece trades on the offer then tighten the spread so that the sellers feel they can take a "quick profit"
by "hitting the bid" on the tight spread.
Once the selling starts the MM's will walk it down quickly by only making small prints on the way down with the tight
spread. Another way is by running the stock up in the morning, averaging up their short then use the above
technique to walk it down in the afternoon.
Market Maker Speaks Out:Ways of a Market Maker
I was an OTC MM for about 10 years ending in the late 80's. Since then I have been strictly an investor. Since I
have not been that up to date in MM rules I will only make statements that I feel fairly confident are still accurate
regarding these activities. By and large most MM don't have a clue nor do they care to learn, about the fundamentals
of the stocks they trade.
They just try to make orderly markets. When dealing with BB stocks it is very easy for a MM to get trapped into
being short in dealing in a fast moving market. Reason being; most of the MM's in this stock are what are called
"wholesalers" this means they don't have retail brokers "working" the stocks.
So they have to rely on what's known as the "call" from larger retail houses. If a "Big" retail firm like an E-trade calls
up a market maker to purchase say 5,000 shares of a stock, they expect to get an "execution" from that market
maker. If he turns them down, or only gives a partial then the "Big" firm will go to another MM.
If this second MM "fills the order" then that "Big" firm has a moral obligation to continue to give future "business" in
that stock to that MM who performed (his life blood). This will go on until he "fails" to perform and so on.
Contrary to popular opinion the "Big" firms Do NOT necessarily go to the "Low Offer" to fill a buy order (Or high bid
for a sell). They "Go" to who they think will perform to fill the order and expect that MM to "match" the "low offer" in
the case of a buy (bid in the case of a sell). Even though this MM might in fact be the "high bid" and not really want
to sell any more.
As a wholesaler he must perform or he will get a reputation as a "non-performer" with the "Big" houses and will cease
getting "calls" which means he will soon go out of business. I mentioned above that this activity is very significant to
BB stocks. I say this because most of the trades in these BB stocks are "unsolicited" and are done through discount
Kevin Porter Friday, 12/13/13 09:21:02 AM
Post # of 46572
Q: Can you tell us a little bit about the Alcatel deal that occurred about 50 days ago ?
VRNG : What deal ?
Q: mmm then what about the Asus schedule hearing that took place on Dec 3 ?
VRNG: Don't know what you are talking about
Q: Will you tell us the outcome of the trial in Germany next Tuesday ?
That sums it up,,,BUY MORE RIGHT?