Seeking Alpha

Bluefin

Bluefin
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Bluefin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Undervalued Vringo's $100M Victory Against Google [View article]
    This article only discusses the royalty if GOOG indeed has a workaround to the infringement, which is highly unlikely. There is no discussion of the cumulative royalty that GOOG will have to pay in future years if it does NOT have a workaround, which is more likely. At 7% of 20.9% of US AdWord revenues, the cumulative royalty will exceed $1 BILLION.

    Why only cover the worst case? Why not discuss the more likely better case?
    Aug 19, 2013. 12:26 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Microsoft And Judge Jackson Gives Vringo More Firepower? [View article]
    If the MSFT settlement did not produce significant value for VRNG, VRNG would not have settled so quickly (within 60 days). Anything less than a big win, their outside lawyers would have stoked the fires to continue with litigation. Therefore, I think we can assume:

    - VRNG feels very confident that the 5% will yield a decent amount.

    - The 6 patents must have material value since the $1 mil + 5% of Google award does not seem rich enough to warrant a quick settlement.

    - VRNG must have had their sights on those 6 patents all along, because 60 days is not enough time to evaluate all the patents in MSFT's massive patent portfolio. VRNG knew what they wanted before the settlement discussions began.
    May 31, 2013. 04:33 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Google Going Out On A Limb With Quest For Vringo Reexamination? [View article]
    Not addressed in this article is the fact that Google was successful in getting the USPTO to reject certain claims (those relevant to Google vs. I/P Engine case) in Patent 420. Google is also trying to have all claims in Patent 664 reexamined and invalidated by the USPTO.

    What I have not seen written anywhere is an insightful discussion on why Google was successful in getting certain claims in Patent 420 invalidated, any why Google may or may not be successful in it's effort to do the same with Patent 664. Without this information, it's pure speculation whether Patent 664 will be upheld or rejected upon reexamination.
    May 5, 2013. 08:32 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Quantitative Valuation For Vringo [View article]
    The notion of applying a traditional P/E multiple to earnings that are NOT from ongoing operations but from a one-time or infrequent event is the biggest error of several in this analysis.

    Also, investors have to recognize that 40% VRNG's capital structure is in options and warrants - very high indeed. You can't focus on current fully diluted shares. You have to focus on the # of fully diluted shares there will be at your target terminal value. For example, if your goal is an exit valuation of $1 billion, you should expect that fully diluted shares will be about 100 million at that PPS, resulting in about $10/share. Using 58 million shares would lead you to believe that you will get $17/share at $1 billion valuation.

    Little understood is the fact that the # of fully diluted shares increases as the share price increase. with 40% of capital structure i options and warrants, the # of fully diluted shares increases dramatically as PPS rises. For VRNG, fully diluted shares can theoretically range from 55 million to 110 million shares, with 105 million being a more realistic high end of range.
    Nov 18, 2012. 10:58 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Seeing The Forest For The Trees [View article]
    Many unsophisticated retail investors read the Form-4's filed with the SEC and start screaming "insider selling" because they do not understand the context. It's a very popular rant on YMB.

    These pre-scheduled selling programs are quite ordinary and harmless. They (1) allow management to convert equity compensation (option exercise or restricted stock vesting) into cash so they can feed their families, and (2) avoid any perception of timing the sales based on inside information because the sales are completed at pre-established intervals. Also, in Vringo's case, these sales are for a tiny % of management's total shares in the company.
    Nov 12, 2012. 10:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Seeing The Forest For The Trees [View article]
    A delay in JJ's final judgment is a positive thing for Vringo. A quick judgment is more likely to result from JJ taking the jury's damage and 3.5% royalty calculations literally and getting this over with. A more deliberate judgment suggests that JJ finds there are important factors to evaluate in the jury's damage and royalty recommendations. Such evaluation increases the chance of JJ either increasing the damages, increasing the royalty rate, or forcing a settlement. I am glad JJ did not issue the final judgment in haste.
    Nov 12, 2012. 07:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Take A Deep Breath, The Roller Coaster Continues [View instapost]
    Interesting point. I get the part that past damages are determine by the jury, but future royalties are determined by the judge. But can the judge really take the infringement verdict out of the jury's hands right before jury deliberations?
    Oct 31, 2012. 04:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: Take A Deep Breath, The Roller Coaster Continues [View instapost]
    Interesting point. I get the part that past damages are determine by the jury, but future royalties are determined by the judge? But can the judge really take the infringement verdict out of the jury's hands right before jury deliberations?

    BTW - is this one spooky Halloween or what!
    Oct 31, 2012. 04:30 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potential Long-Term Value Of Vringo Is $100 A Share [View article]
    Erik,
    Very thoughtful ideas in this article. I think we can all agree that $100 is not a gimme or should even be assigned a high probability. But we can't dismiss it either. One thing I've learned over 30 years of studying, investing in, and running businesses is that great talent + great ideas + great assets can create transformational businesses that exceed all expectations. At one point, GOOG, AAPL, AMZN were tiny companies with 27 employees like VRNG, and I dare say that they had less experience and talent than VRNG at that stage. I sold my investment in all those companies and many other big winners way too early.

    There's no guarantee that VRNG will ever be a large, successful operating company even 1/10 the size of those entities. But they have a team that I would not bet against. And for anyone who wants to have a potential 25x return component as a small piece of their investment portfolio, I don't know of one that is better.
    Oct 30, 2012. 07:23 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: A Mid-Trial Report [View article]
    Steve, it's refreshing to read someone who is mindful of the limits of their expertise and refuses to offer loose opinions. It adds credibility to the matters that you do opine on. Most writers and commenters on the web are just soooo eager to share their views regardless of qualification and merit. So many are like children crying out for attention.
    Oct 24, 2012. 10:04 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo, It's Really Now Or Never [View article]
    Gracefully handled. Good luck with your future posts.
    Oct 24, 2012. 12:03 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo, It's Really Now Or Never [View article]
    Stephen,

    In all honesty, this article has no substance and offers nothing new. You recite the obvious and the familiar that others have already covered days/weeks ago And, the details of your own trades are only interesting and relevant to you - certainly not to the reader.

    I suggest that you hold off on your writing ambitions until you have something new and substantive to say. With this article, you are just embarrassing yourself.
    Oct 23, 2012. 07:57 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: The Simplicity Behind All The Complexity [View article]
    Go to Vringo web site, investor information, and look at the latest proxy dated from October which was filed with the SEC. There are 110 mil shares, options, warrants, etc. but you need to reduce that for the effect of the proceeds from exercise price of options and warrants. How many shares those exercise price proceeds will reduce the total number of shares depends on the share price at the time of exercise. So figure 100 - 105 mil as the effective fully diluted shares outstanding.
    Oct 23, 2012. 07:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Vs. Google: The Simplicity Behind All The Complexity [View article]
    There are 110 millions shares if you include common stock, restricted stock, options and warrant outstanding. The offsetting effect of proceeds from the exercise price of options and warrants would reduce this number by 5 - 10 mil shares, depending on the final take out price.

    Many are forgetting that the I/P Engine acquisition was accomplished with a large issuance of stock that resulted in the former shareholders of VRNG owning only 1/3 of the company following the acquisition. This was followed by another 10 mil share issuance for the $45 mil private placement few weeks ago.

    So, at $3.70/share, the current market capitalization is around $400 million.
    Oct 23, 2012. 07:18 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Vringo Upside Overstated, Risks Understated [View article]
    Mod - I think most longs in VRNG understand that this is a speculative position and not an investment (or as Steve Kim so aptly put it - "It's a bet."). But the fact that MSFT has not acquired VRNG yet means nothing. I can't speak for MSFT's interest in VRNG patents, but what I do know is that VRNG management is supposed to dangle these patents in front of Google, MSFT, YHOO, and anyone else who may show an interest.

    Key aspect of this to consider is this - if MSFT takes an interest in VRNG patents, it will likely slow down the settlement/acquisition process. The reasons being:

    1) Ballmer is not sitting around reading patents. MSFT management have to rely on legal opinions. But their attorneys cannot give them a definitive opinion (only the court can). So this thrusts MSFT management into being a speculator also, and public company management are not comfortable with that - they have to be deliberate, obtain consensus, etc.

    2) Both Google and MSFT would know that regardless of how high of a price either offered, VRNG will give the "last call" to the other company and any others that may have shown an interest. This motivates all bidders to not be the first one to make a big offer. And there's no good way for VRNG to scare either party to make the first offer, other than perhaps if they get a very favorable outcome from the Google litigation.

    3) Both Google and MSFT probably realize that if they get into a bidding war on a speculative asset, they may end up paying well in excess of any award from patent litigation. Look at what Facebook paid for Pinterest, just to keep it out of the hands of other social media companies.

    On balance, if MSFT is currently in discussions with VRNG, the kabuki theater of M&A will likely require more time for resolution. Of course there is no indication that any of this is going on, but if I'm a board member of VRNG, I would feel a duty to my shareholders to give MSFT a call. And I have always believed that the way VRNG gets to $20 - $30/share is not through the patent court, but through Google and MSFT bidding against each other.
    Oct 15, 2012. 09:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
18 Comments
34 Likes