<Damn I didn't know we were providing free lunch to all posters, both
rude and polite!>
Kind of the nature of a public forum, Jim. Even YOU get to be both rude and/or polite, and to partake of the "free lunch".
<Perhaps in the future you might express yourself differently in the
first place, and you might get answers to the questions you pose!>
As you may have gleaned from my previous posts here Jim, I'm pretty anti-hype (on any stock that I own or follow - not just Amati). So my question was not in the spirit of asking for an opinion or for speculation. I was sharply questioning a stated fact for the public record to ensure the emphasis would be on accuracy, and not speculation. Nonetheless the response was somewhat ambiguous. I wish that there was NOT the kind of hype on this thread that requires sharper, more cautious verification. But unfortunately, that's not the case here.
I should also note that stock hype in public forums is also a concern of the SEC. You mentioned AOL, presumably the Motley Fool board. I'm sure you saw the WSJ article I quoted several months back, which mentioned Amati, Comparator and Iomega, as well as Pat Mudge in her role as an MF. Apparently MF was doing away with their non-salaried stock 'guides' (which Pat apparently was involved in the Amati thread) The reason for the change apparently was a shared concern by MF with the SEC of the potential for stock hyping and the desire for MF to more clearly control their representatives. (Note, no specific link between Pat Mudge, Motley Fool, Amati and stock hyping was explicitly made by the WSJ article.)
BTW, thanks for the Edgar 10Q url, Jim. I dug around and came up with the following from within the Amati 1996 10Q.
First, I will note and acknowledge that it IS referenced that there are royalties to AMTX from MOT, EXACTLY as Pat had stated.
Having acknowledged that, the question of actual *net* dollars obviously still persists. Much of the salient info is not publically disclosed. If you or Pat know what these numbers or percentages actually are, you are privy to more information than is in the public domain.
Remaining AMTX/MOT/CG questions are:
Amati gets royalty free use of the MOT "Interim Chip Set" only until end of 1997. This leaves completely open the question of how much Amati has to pay to MOT for the LICENSED PRODUCT (2.4 and 5.2 below).
How much has MOT already paid Amati on FUTURE royalties, such that NO revenue may be due for a period of time (4.2)?
Of course, the public also doesn't (and perhaps WILL NOT?) know what per cent and for how many years any net revenues will come in, provided ANY (non-software upgradeable) CGs are produced and sold.
Specific sections from Amati 10Q on Edgar
----------------------------
2.2 AMATI grants and agrees to grant to MOTOROLA and its SUBSIDIARIES a worldwide, nonexclusive, nonassignable, irrevocable (subject to Section 6.5), royalty bearing right and license, without the right to grant sublicenses, under AMATI PATENTS to design, manufacture, have manufactured, use, lease, sell, or otherwise dispose of LICENSED PRODUCTS
2.4 MOTOROLA grants to AMATI a worldwide, nonexclusive, nonassignable,
irrevocable(subject to section 6.6), royalty free right and license, without the right to grant sublicenses, under MOTOROLA's Trellis Code patents numbered 4,755,998, 4,713,817, and 4,700,349 to have manufactured, use, lease, sell or otherwise dispose of the INTERIM CHIP SET until twelve (12) months after MOTOROLA's first sale of the LICENSED PRODUCT, or until January 1, 1998 whichever occurs first.
2.5 Except as provided for in this Section 2, no other licenses are granted herein.
...
4.1 For the rights granted in Section 2 MOTOROLA agrees to pay AMATI a
running royalty on MOTOROLA'S Net Sales of LICENSED PRODUCTS of
(i)[***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] per cent for [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] years after the effective date of the agreement, (ii)
[***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] per cent for a [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] year period beginning on the [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] year after the effective date of the Agreement, and (iii) a negotiated royalty rate to be added to the [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] per cent [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] per cent in (ii) above for use of the group [] patents for the [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] year period beginning on the [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] year after the effective date of the Agreement, such negotiated royalty rate not to exceed [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***]
percent. Furthermore, if AMATI should charge any third party only a running royalty and such running royalty is less than that charged to Motorola in this Section 4.1 for a licenses under AMATI PATENTS to make ADSL products, the royalty herein shall be reduced to equal such lower value. Should any other compensation terms under AMATI PATENTS to make ADSL products in the aggregate be more favorable to a third party than to MOTOROLA, then AMATI shall notify MOTOROLA of such terms, and if MOTOROLA desires, then the parties shall negotiate terms comparable to that given to the third party.
4.2 MOTOROLA agrees to pay AMATI an advance against future royalties in the form of [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] monthly payments of
[***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] each, beginning within thirty (30) days after the execution of this Agreement; provided that [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] of the royalties accrued against the LICENSED PRODUCT shall be credited toward such advance until the [***CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL***] have been recovered by MOTOROLA.
5.2 MOTOROLA agrees to sell the LICENSED PRODUCT to AMATI
-----------------------
Uninspired by hype, but most appreciative of facts, delivered rudely, grouchily, cheeringly or otherwise.
Best to all-
Steve |
