Yes. It is in such a place. Henry and I have repeatedly pointed this out to you.

Wow, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed?

This isn't complicated stuff, actually, and what I'm saying is both straightforward and not hard to understand - I'll lay it out for you below.

You're viewing this FTC probe in isolation. The FTC would likely not. I think I'm beginning to see how your brain works and it is in a very... eh, compartmentalized fashion. Henry, no activity is in isolation, just FYI.

That is a lot of back and forth in your thinking on what is frankly a pretty clear issue for Google.

Google just bought a large number of patents from Motorola. The FTC is investigating whether or not Google is engaging in antitrust practices (ie, charging licensing fees for patents that are industry standard/fall under fair use). If Google is found to be engaging in antitrust activities around a recent acquisition of mobile device patents, this will have implications for the next time they look to buy mobile device patents. The FTC will be all over them on it.

I think it's odd that you would say there's "zero chance". Are you saying the FTC won't conduct a thorough review from an antitrust perspective of Google buying RIM's patent portfolio? Of course they would - hence there is regulatory risk.

Hm - actually, are you saying there can never be antitrust/regulatory risk if one company looks to buy up a large number of patents? If so, haha, dude... of course there can! A single company owning that much IP has huge antitrust implications!

The logic I outlined above is, again, pretty straightforward. You're obviously not an antitrust lawyer, so not sure why you're so definitive on this topic. I'm interested in this issue, and it seems pretty transparent to me - I'll just ask my antitrust guys about this. If they have anything to say I'll report back to the thread.

BTW, when I posted the Motorola/Google article, I was trying to be value add information-wise for you and others. Obviously if there is regulatory risk, patent values can be impacted. Based on your response, I think you took it as a confrontational post. Definitely not my intention. People are looking to invest money here on RIM (at least I am), not engage in some lolInternet debate. Figure more information the better.

But always do appreciate your POV.

Thanks, I missed this very important point. And makes a ton of sense. Appreciate your insight.

How can you guys spend this much time posting on this stuff?

I learned a lot on the topic, which was my point to posting ITT. I'm not sure why others are posting so much, though I'm grateful as they're taking the time to answer my questions.

I'm bored. My job entails a lot of sitting at the computer doing... nothing.

No. Antitrust / competition law can become an issue with licensing practices but it can not be used to prevent the acquisition of patents. The reason should be obvious -- if frand guidelines are followed there is no anti-competitive behavior possible so no reason to ever block acquisition.

Your reasoning seems to almost be based on a claim that the FTC would behave punitively toward Google because of the frand issue. That is not how it works and further the issue predates Google owning the patents and is anything but unique. The problem is that frand is very clear on intent but very lacking in detail and situations like that always lead to litigation.

They will not review if only the patents are purchased.

No. See explanation above of why you are wrong.

While I'm not an antitrust lawyer I did at specialize in IP law and am also quite familiar with competition law. Granted this was not in the States but I still think I'm going to consider myself considerably better qualified on this subject than you.

Adding value is not introducing something that is irrelevant and then claiming that there is regulatory risk when there is none -- that is actually the opposite of adding value.

Got it - and that was my reasoning tbh. Makes sense that Google could easily push back if there is no antitrust issue with RIM.

Didn't realize you had an IP background - in fact I always forget you're not just some rando jobless guy who turboposts on 2p2, but that you in fact have a law degree/were a lawyer. I would've approached my questions to you in a completely different manner had I recalled.

BTW, out of curiosity, what do you do for a living these days?

Def fair enough - you seem pretty convinced, and make a convincing argument, that there is no regulatory risk. Good to know.

To be fair, it's only explained once to each personality.

Holy **** JLF/Henry...

So, getting back to the gist of the OP; what do we think about buying RIMM @ the current level ($7.34)?

Personally, it's a play I would be hesitant to speculate in (not my style atm), however some may want to dabble.

Possibility of bidding war to pop the stock? Thoughts?

Haha, nice burn. And sorry, I seriously always forget that your boyfriend is not some rando 18yo troll, and that he actually knows a lot of stuff. I'll try to bear that in mind for our next encounter.

FWIW, all my questions were around assessing the potential for a bidding war emerging. I was focused on the patent valuation because that seems to have the broadest appeal from an acquisition standpoint.

+1 on hearing people's thoughts on this. To what sc000t said, it seems more likely RIM does not have the assets to drive a bidding war for an outright acquisition of the entire company, and will be auctioned off in bits 'n' pieces, so buying RIM at current levels doesn't seem to make sense.

Sounds convincing.

FWIW, I'm not 100% convinced you're not a precocious 18yo troll.

I think sometimes you forget this is an anonymous message board where for the most part no one truly knows anyone's credentials (which is why I question everyone), and frankly, your specific academic (and financial) credentials have come under fire many times!

But I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

Peace, Henry, think we should be good now

I bought this stock about 3 years ago at about $75.
When buying this stock I was always interested in the company as I believed in it then what convinced back when was a story I read from RBC Securities that predicted the stock would be about $150 after two years. We'll we all know what happened in this time frame. I finally sold my RIM stocks last week and I lost about 85%. This was a lesson hard learned about myself and additionally it proved to myself that supposed experts are educated morons.

eh one simply should not take sell-side research reports seriously and especially the "price targets" they put on there.