Seeking Alpha

Mark Hartner

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Mark Hartner's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Marvell Lawsuit: Don't Worry, It Gets Worse [View article]
    You are correct, having less shares out there is a good thing. Not being able to explain why there are less shares outstanding is a bad thing.
    Jan 2 11:47 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell Lawsuit: Don't Worry, It Gets Worse [View article]
    The sentence you quoted above is my interpretation of CMU's claim.

    If you want to see what CMU was trying to claim, take a look at docket 708, which is kind of a powerpoint summary of CMU's arguments. The Judge did not allow CMU to use this powerpoint presentation in court (she said they had to do it the old-fashioned way), but it gives you a good idea of what they were trying to argue.
    Jan 2 11:35 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell Lawsuit: Don't Worry, It Gets Worse [View article]
    I am not a lawyer.

    I think the odds of a re-trial are very slim, just because Judge Fischer ruled against them on that motion, essentially saying that she would take it into consideration after the trial when looking at the damages award. Marvell's argument for a re-trial was that CMU had made some prejudicial closing arguments. The Judge let the trial continue to a verdict, but I think she may still us it against CMU as an excuse for not awarding any extra damages or to sanction the CMU's lawyers.

    I have no opinion on the odds of a reversal, I'll wait for the patent lawyers to chime in. I do think that it would take several years for such a reversal to happen.

    A settlement is also a tricky question. Both sides seem to have dug their heels in. I would also put the odds of a settlement very low.
    Jan 2 11:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Loss In Patent Case Turns Marvell Technology Into Dead Money [View article]
    I don't think you will see any action on an appeal until after May.

    An injunction isn't in the cards, that has already been decided by the Judge. As it stands, Marvell will pay 1.2 billion in back royalties and 50 cents per HD chip sold in the future.
    Dec 28 09:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell: Is It Time To Throw In The Towel? [View article]
    You are exactly right, Marvell _could_ have argued a 8.8c per unit was more reasonable. The problem is that Marvell never made that argument in court. Instead, Marvell dug up old CMU licensing agreements that weren't really applicable to the case in an effort to convince everyone that a one-time $250k royalty was the proper amount. Marvell's damages expert failed miserably, and the jury was left with no alternative but to grant the 50c royalty CMU asked for.

    You are also exactly right, that our patent system is completely broken and will chase companies away from the US.
    Dec 28 08:37 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell: Is It Time To Throw In The Towel? [View article]
    I just submitted my very first SA article per your suggestion. The article is on Marvell, but I am not sure how long it will take for it to show up since I am a new author. Please check it out when it comes out.
    Dec 27 12:39 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell: Is It Time To Throw In The Towel? [View article]
    $1.2 Billion and a 50 cent per chip royalty going forward will definitely have a financial impact. If the results of the lawsuit were factored into the stock price, then your strategy might work.
    Dec 27 12:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did David Einhorn Sell Out Of Marvell? [View article]
    Today we have the answer. Einhorn upped his stake by 30% and now owns approx 32M shares(according to 13F filed today).
    Nov 14 06:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell Earnings Preview: Looking To LSI And Western Digital Results For Clues [View article]
    Ashraf, informative as always.

    I would like to add a little insight to the "Shares Outstanding" graph and Marvell's share buyback program. Based on Marvell's SEC filings, their recent share count looks as follows:
    August 24th, 2012: 557.8 million (reported on 10Q filing date)
    July 28th, 2012: 562.4 million (reported on quarter end)
    May 25th, 2012: 563.4 million (reported on 10Q filing date)
    April 28th, 2012: 580.0 million (reported on quarter end)
    Mar 16th, 2012: 580.6 million (reported on 10k filing date)
    Jan 28th, 2012: 607.9 million (reported on year end)

    So, _roughly_ speaking, we can deduce the following:

    Feb 1st -Mar 16th 2012: Marvell repurchased 27.3m shares
    Mar 17th-Apr 2012: Marvell repurchased 0m shares
    In Apr 2012: Marvell repurchased 0m shares
    In May 2012: Marvell repurchased 17m shares
    In Jun 2012: Marvell repurchased 0m shares
    In Jul 2012: Marvell repurchased 0m shares
    In Aug 2012: Marvell repurchased 5m shares

    The takeaways are:
    1) in addition to the share count reported at quarter end, we also get a sneak peek into their share count when they file their official 10Q a few weeks later (in the first page of their filing).

    2) Marvell's share buyback pattern is erratic. They appear to be buying back shares in the few weeks leading up to their earnings announcement (true for at least for 2011Q4, 2012Q1 and 2012Q2). It would be interesting to dig further back and see if the same pattern still holds.

    3) Marvell seems to have put the brakes on their share buyback program. There were hardly any shares bought back between May 25th to Aug 24th. The relatively small 5m shares they did buy back were also purchased around their earnings release in August.

    4) With the amount of money Marvell has been putting towards buying back shares they have the ability to affect the share price short term, especially if the do the buyback in a more concentrated manner as they appear to be doing.

    Mark
    Nov 2 02:34 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell Pre-Announces: No Near-Term Catalyst To Support Long-Term Value [View article]
    Ashraf, I have been following your articles and appreciate your candid analysis, we may have a bit in common. I am a Computer Engineering graduate with about 8 years in the industry, and enjoy doing stock analysis. I have also been long MRVL, but sold today. I would like to share some of my own analysis with you.

    Revenues at Marvell have been basically flat for the past 3 quarters (800M +/- 3%), and the entire industry has been struggling this last quarter. I don't think Marvel's revenue drop alone is enough to justify the departure of their CFO.

    I used the departure of their CFO as an excuse to take a deep dive into their most recently filed 10Qs. One thing I noticed was that there were some important changes in their 10Qs related to their upcoming patent trial with CMU on November 27th. Search Marvell's two most recently filed 10Q's for "Carnegie Mellon Litigation", and also take a look at http://bit.ly/VdjBrn

    In relation to the CMU litigation, you will notice that in their most recently filed 10Q Marvell removed the language stating that they "cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss", and buried way down in the footnotes on page 35, in a totally unrelated section, Marvell added the following language "CMU has alleged that it is entitled to damages in the amount of approximately $735 million through March 2010 as a result of the alleged infringement". Although I admire the wizardy of Marvell's management in being able to bury important information deep in the footnotes of their financial statement, I don't see this as particularly shareholder friendly.

    If you read the docket, you will see that the patents in question relate to error-correcting codes for magnetic media. These types of codes are at the heart of Marvell's HD controllers. They are presumably part of what allows Marvell to achieve the high Gigabyte per platter density frequently touted during their conference calls. HD controllers have been Marvell's bread and butter for many years, so this lawsuit goes right to the core of their business.

    Long-term, I think Marvell could be a great investment, but I am going to sit it out until December and see how things unfold. The upcoming patent trial and related publicity does not bode well for Marvell's stock price, and I don't think the current share price reflects the risks of this trial. I would also like to see more "color" (as the analysts would put it) around the departure of their CFO.
    Oct 19 05:32 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Marvell Pre-Announces: No Near-Term Catalyst To Support Long-Term Value [View article]
    Ashraf, I have been following your articles and appreciate your candid analysis, we may have a bit in common. I am a Computer Engineering graduate with about 8 years in the industry, and enjoy doing stock analysis. I have also been long MRVL, but sold today. I would like to share some of my own analysis with you.

    Revenues at Marvell have been basically flat for the past 3 quarters (800M +/- 3%), and the entire industry has been struggling this last quarter. I don't think Marvel's revenue drop alone is enough to justify the departure of their CFO.

    I used the departure of their CFO as an excuse to take a deep dive into their most recently filed 10Qs. One thing I noticed was that there were some important changes in their 10Qs related to their upcoming patent trial with CMU on November 27th. Search Marvell's two most recently filed 10Q's for "Carnegie Mellon Litigation", and also take a look at http://bit.ly/VdjBrn

    In relation to the CMU litigation, you will notice that in their most recently filed 10Q Marvell removed the language stating that they "cannot determine the likelihood of loss nor estimate a range of possible loss", and buried way down in the footnotes on page 35, in a totally unrelated section, Marvell added the following language "CMU has alleged that it is entitled to damages in the amount of approximately $735 million through March 2010 as a result of the alleged infringement". Although I admire the wizardy of Marvell's management in being able to bury important information deep in the footnotes of their financial statement, I don't see this as particularly shareholder friendly.

    If you read the docket, you will see that the patents in question relate to error-correcting codes for magnetic media. These types of codes are at the heart of Marvell's HD controllers. They are presumably part of what allows Marvell to achieve the high Gigabyte per platter density frequently touted during their conference calls. HD controllers have been Marvell's bread and butter for many years, so this lawsuit goes right to the core of their business.

    Long-term, I think Marvell could be a great investment, but I am going to sit it out until December and see how things unfold. The upcoming patent trial and related publicity does not bode well for Marvell's stock price, and I don't think the current share price reflects the risks of this trial. I would also like to see more "color" (as the butt-kissing analysts would put it) around the departure of their CFO.
    Oct 19 04:23 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
26 Comments
29 Likes