Seeking Alpha

hbaskerville

hbaskerville
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View hbaskerville's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Proof Positive That Vringo Is Dead Money [View article]
    So the proof positive that VRNG is dead is that the company did not issue a press release? Sounds kinda thin . . . .
    Dec 18 10:24 AM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • American International Group Inc declares $0.10 dividend [View news story]
    This is an extremely misleading post. Normally I'm a big fan of Seeking Alpha, but this is beneath you. No mention whatsoever of the fact that the prior dividend of $0.22 was in 2008 before AIG collapsed. The truth here is that AIG just reinstated its dividend for the first time in almost five years. This is good news. Calling it a "54.5% decrease" in bright red letters is deceiving and bad form.
    Aug 1 06:16 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ConocoPhillips: The Best Investment In The Energy Sector? [View article]
    Am i missing something? This sentence doesn't seem to make any sense: "Ten years ago, the stock was trading at around $19 and one could buy 500 shares for one thousand dollars." Wouldn't 500 * 19 = $9500? As far as I can tell, COP has never traded anywhere near $2/share. I like your article, but the entire premise of the last three paragraphs seems mistaken.
    Apr 9 05:38 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Apple Is A Short-Term Sell Based On David Einhorn's Plan [View article]
    @Drew9944 -- exactly. This article ignores how every stock works before and after ex-dividend dates for large special dividends. Typically, the stock either is flat or rises before the ex-dividend, drops slightly after the ex-dividend date (since the special dividend is no longer available and people can sell and still get the special dividend) and then drops by the rest of the price of the special dividend after the dividend is distributed. This is because people buy before the ex-dividend date to get the special dividend -- exactly as this author suggests -- causing the stock to rise before the ex-dividend date. The stock drops after because, by definition, the company is less valuable, having distributed a large special dividend to shareholders. The very definition of special dividends provides that the stock should drop by the amount of the special dividend.

    So, following this authors advice, a current shareholder would at best be the same having sold now and repurchased before ex-dividend (assuming the stock stayed flat) and at worst, substantially worse off should Apple rise when others get the idea to buy before the ex-dividend date. And that's totally ignoring any fees for buying and selling, and any tax differences possibly caused by long-term v. short-term capital gains and/or any wash rule issues. Consequently, IMO, this article is extremely short-sided.
    Feb 26 11:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Mark Cuban Raises His Position In Vringo. Should You? [View article]
    Thanks for the article. Just an FYI, the jury found Google "liable," not "guilty." Guilt is only for criminal cases.
    Feb 14 02:12 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pandora Media (P): Q3 EPS of $0.05 beats by $0.04. Revenue of $120M (+60% Y/Y) beats by $3M. Shares -21.1% AH. (PR[View news story]
    So, Pandora beat the street on both numbers and shares are down 21% in after hours? WTF?
    Dec 4 04:14 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo's Kryptonite [View article]
    Joe:
    You're misreading the proposed legislation. The term "succeeding" refers to whether the plaintiff would succeed at trial. So, in VRNG's case it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Lycos would have succeeded as a company. This simply means that if the Court determines that a case is not likely to succeed, i.e., is frivolous, the Court may award attorneys' fees to the defendant.

    You're also putting to much stock in this "change" in legislation. 35 U.S.C. 285, already provides "The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party." At most, this "change" merely lowers the bar for awarding fees.
    Dec 3 02:21 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Verdict Imminent, Trading Halted [View instapost]
    I intend to hold my VRNG stock. It's patents have been deemed valid. It gets a 3.5% royalty from Google until 2016. And this case sets the tone for future cases against Yahoo, Microsoft, and others. By the way, Reuters seems to think the future royalties could be worth $500MM:
    http://yhoo.it/SLmQIc
    Nov 6 04:11 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Verdict Imminent, Trading Halted [View instapost]
    If you followed the updates on Twitter, people were expecting a grand slam home run. While of course i would have liked a bigger number in past royalties, the important part is that the Judge will calculate future royalties and the patents have been deemed valid. The potential downside from a Google appeal is off-set by an appeal of the laches ruling by Vringo. VRNG is not going to $100 tomorrow, but it's only going up from here.
    Nov 6 03:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: What To Watch For In The Jury Verdict [View article]
    Alan:
    What makes you think that Dickstein Shapiro has this case on a contingency?
    Nov 2 10:47 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Investors' Trial FAQ [View article]
    I assume by now that everyone has seen the news:

    http://bit.ly/VDV3aZ
    Oct 31 02:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Investors' Trial FAQ [View article]
    Steve:
    Is the Court open today?
    Oct 29 01:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: A Mid-Trial Report [View article]
    Leading the witness means asking questions that suggest the answer, like, "The light was green, correct?" You cannot ask leading questions during the direct examination of your own witness. But you are right that leading your own expert shows a lack of preparation because an expert essentially should be able to do the direct examination alone with only a few softball questions from the lawyer that he (or she) knocks out of the park.
    Oct 26 11:58 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: A Mid-Trial Report [View article]
    Asia24,
    Vringo absolutely can and will ask Ungar about Judge Posner's conclusions.
    Oct 25 06:04 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Trial Update For 10/21/2012 [View instapost]
    darkangel:

    You said, " Does VRNG get a third chance to ask Their witness Dr. Frieder more questions to clarify things after Googles cross examination"

    Yes. Vringo gets an opportunity to do a "re-direct" examination after Google finishes its cross. Theoretically, Google could then do "re-cross," followed by another round of Vringo's "re-direct," and so on. But, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being that they don't want to look unprepared, the parties typically do not go back and fourth like a game of ping pong. Additionally, each "re" is confined to issues raised by the last examination of the opponent and so the issues one can raise become narrower and narrower. Also, the party that put the witness on (Vringo, here) gets the last word regardless.
    Oct 22 06:02 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
44 Comments
48 Likes