Member Info for BeContrarian

I agree that macroeconomic forces are weighing us down, but the logic seems totally silly to me.

If you’ve invested in an event driven stock, especially one that will involve a dollar payment, why on earth would you sell because the UK is faring badly, it just doesn’t make sense.

Anyone here for exposure to the court case could have a superb inflationary hedge here…as has so far proved the case.

A good point Grezzz and I’m sure there will be irons in the fire in terms of shareholder comms and perhaps a special divi for existing shareholders. Also a commercial contract will also help investors to stay put. But you’re right it’s a situation that will need to be managed.

Great to see Hawi back posting, hope you had a good break.

My thoughts on the in limine motions:
- overall I think we emerge pretty unscathed from the rulings and it allows us to proceed as intended
- the in limine motions have been ruled on in good time. Had the original date stood, it would’ve been an ‘11th hour’ decision on these motions. I wonder if the trial was always likely to be delayed from the outset, or perhaps judge Gilstrap was hopeful of a settlement and laid off ruling? Speculation I know.
- whichever way you put it this is the last piece of business to be settled and lays out the rules for engagement in court. With all the information to hand, this is the window for Samsung to make serious noises around settlement, IF (and it’s a big if) there is to be one.

Doesn’t say if they’ve been granted or denied?

There have been RNSs with less material information than a rescheduled trial date. The one summarising the first day of the pre trial conference springs to mind.
Maybe Tenner doesn’t want to mislead the market by trotting out his ‘we’re going to trial’ line ;)

Nano has been good to me, but there are some real bargains out there and I am hugely overweight here at the minute.
Would love a settlement allowing me to rebalance slightly. Would still keep a chunk in here regardless.

That would be ironic picador! Imagine if our lawyer’s opening gambit is to rip them all off the walls haha

Nano was 10p then for a reason. Back then it was fighting for its survival and the outlook in terms of the legal proceedings, shrouded in uncertainty. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but I would say 10p then and 50p now is a fair reflection of the respective situations.

He’s at it again haha ;)

Intrusive is such a tease. Instinct tells me his little hints are genuine.

Had time to digest that fascinating docket. Thanks again Morbox. Another chapter is added to the narrative of Samsung’s wilful infringement. What other fireworks must be hiding in these redacted dockets? Goes to show we were getting our knickers in a twist about sufficiency. That’s not going to fly with a jury when you have a crystal clear narrative of wilful theft and then an attempt to purchase what were apparently invalid patents. You couldn’t invent a worse case of wilfulness if you tried IMO.

If Samsung want to chance their arm in court, good luck to them. But it’ll be a bludgeoning if they do, and another big dent in their reputation.

Thank you Morbox

Turcan’s departure is bullish in my view. As a LOAM man, he may well have been installed to ensure their interests are being well managed at board level. With what seems to be an ever improving fiscal outlook, maybe that active management is no longer deemed necessary by LOAM.

Another way of looking at it is that he wants to trade but his insider status is currently stopping that. Doing it now is simply lining up ducks before the fireworks (or fire depending on which way it goes haha).

Pretty exciting to think that if there is going to be a settlement, it’s likely going to be this week. I don’t see this going to the 11th hour on the revised date but as others have mentioned, an attempt to get things done based on what would have been trial week.

Hold tight folks, could be a transformational week!

Cheap date!

If intrusive has called it right I’m buying him whatever he wants

I for one am very very grateful to our funders. Who knows, they may have been the only ones willing to back us. A high chance we would be toast by now if we attempted to go it alone, that or an IP shell. To be honest, the alternatives don’t bear thinking about.

They have given us carte Blanche to pursue the best legal representation possible and hopefully, it is about to pay off big time for all concerned.

I think the entire financial arrangement means that both parties are naturally aligned with little need for interference. The higher % of a lower damages figure will naturally lead plaintiffs to push for the maximum they can reasonably hope for. So I do think that cases of inherent differences of opinion would be very rare EVEN IF funders were directly involved.

I think it’s also worth mentioning that once the case is underway, I believe what Sammy is saying and funders are perfectly passive. That doesn’t mean to say, though, that funders make their feelings known about possible amounts etc at the point at which the case is being stress tested, just prior to a deal being signed.

So I’m with Feeks there are elements of both in play, but funders are by and large totally passive.

Come on guys, cool heads! Sitting on a nice ride today and if intrusive is on the money an early Christmas present for all!

This is probably going down as the stupidest top up given my reason is simply a cryptic comment from Intrusive but I’ve sling a few hundred extra on this as intrusive called the Germany litigation RNS so praying for a settlement!