SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
QCOM 162.88-1.0%10:00 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: scratchmyback who wrote (79283)7/28/2008 12:33:22 PM
From: AlfaNut  Read Replies (2) of 197217
 
I don't see any other alternative for Nokia than to book it as a one time item for the third quarter.

Absolutely not. Any payment that is defined in the agreement as an up-front license fee MUST be expensed ratably over the life of the agreement. Not really a choice - this is GAAP. Such a payment would show more clearly in the balance sheet (prepaid expense) or cash flow statement if it isn't too obscured by other items. Likewise, QCOM MUST recognize an up-front license fee over the life of the agreement.

Note also that Nokia has been accruing royalty/license type expenses since the prior expiration date. Everything will get trued up as the final agreement is signed. I have no idea how much Nokia has accrued as a liability, but this will also affect the net current expense, perhaps very significantly. I point this out as it is one area where people will get confused.

One final comment. There has been a lot of chatter about "make up" royalty payments and so on. I would advise against thinking of the monies like this, as I can almost guarantee that the two parties will NOT define the payments as such.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext