Quarterhill Inc T.QTRH

Divesture of Wilan?

[astutein]

I believe all of  this talk of divesture is premature.

I suggest we wait for next six months until 2 apple cases decided. 1 US and 1 Germany

Although wilan shown as zero ,this is ridiculous as Wilan sitting with approx 50 million cash before Q3 next week and value zero, I don't think so.   This 50 million cash can be used for QTRH ITS.
plus Q3 results.   50  million is pre debenture)  (Working Capital  138 minus 75 advance to purchase  ETC.

Wait for next six months to see cash in Wilan ( 50 million plus Q3.
Subsequent to Q3 let's wait and see any major licensing agreements that may be signed.and currently being negotiated.  Don't forget our licensing is new Wilan and worlds largest Semis in world.

Without financing of Wilan , there would be no QTRH ITS INC. Wilan may be our bank of future and yet we want to dispose of our creator?

[wilander]

you havent been here as long as most of us astutein. sell the pig and lets move on.

[astutein]

wilander -The pig you are talking about created ITS INC. With out INTEL,sAMSUNG  and licensing agreements there would be no  ITS. Furthermore ,it is you who have come back for Apple and have no intention stated by you to be around for ITS which created by Wilan. You have come back for Wilan ( Apple )and yet you critize (PIG).   Others are in QTRH for ITS contrary to you.

[astutein]

I have been advised by my lawyer friend that any purchaser would normally  have to agree to enforce any signed license agreements of company"s patents . Purchaser of Wilan could possibily  be sued for non compliance and enforcement of signed confidential agreements and failure to enforce in court. ..   For reasons above, (IMO) divesture of Wilan will not occur. (IMO

[shareholders1]

The following, from Astutein's, post is nonsense: " I have been advised by my lawyer friend that any purchaser would normally  have to agree to enforce any signed license agreements of company"s patents . Purchaser of Wilan could possibily  be sued for non compliance and enforcement of signed confidential agreements and failure to enforce in court. ..   For

[astutein]

shareolders  your comments are non-sense.   You are agreeing totalling with my comments when you saw the new owner would bend over to make sure  favourable contracts were enforceable and remained that way.  My post says what you are saying  "Purchaser would normally have to agree to enforce any signed  license agreements . Lawyers opinion appears correct

[astutein]

Cabbie- I fully support your views that Wilan should be sold post Apple and the funds better to put use in ITS segment.   Both agree. We both agree is fact there is problem valuing Wilan and enforcement of all existing licensing contracts and existing contracts under discussion which neither of us know potential value.. Extreme problem for purchser. For that reason, it is myopinion

[Joey67]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[cabbieJBJ]

Joey, I agree Wilan will not be given away. I believe wilan has not entertained being sold because it has been impossible to value it. That is about to change courtesy of the CAFC. Only then will QTRH be able to evaluate the of a Wilan sale versus continuing operations. However, it's my opinion that the analysis will favor divestment, for the reasons posted earlier

[cabbieJBJ]

Astutein, I have zero idea what you are talking about regarding enforcement of existing contracts/licenses. I certainly have not agreed with you on this. Licenses are, for the most part, lump sum. In any event, any purchasers assume existing commitments made by the company being acquired.

[shareholders1]

Astutein - are you for real ? "My post says what you are saying  "Purchaser would normally have to agree to enforce any signed  license agreements . Lawyers opinion appears correct and validated by you. for that reason it will be extremely difficult to sell Wilan." Think. You are saying that it would be extremely difficult to sell Wilan ..to a purchaser...who

[shareholders1]

Astutein, Sorry to say, but most of what you write is poorly written and not fully thought out. And now, it is clear you lack some fundamental knowledge about what you actually own. So I do not think your advice is credible at all. What is this "creator" nonsense? Look at the  lack of turnover at the BoD. Look at the LT chart. I do not understand your deference.  

[astutein]

shareholders1-  I know exctly what I own and I have a fundamental knowledge what I am saying. For your information without Wilan there  would be no ITS. CREATOR-FACT  FACT You are referring to past  BOD which I agree left questions. For your information we have new BOD if you check BOD in last 2 years.  We have turnover verses  your comment no turnover. 

[cabbieJBJ]

Astutein, there are some misrepresentations in your post that need comment. There is 1 case in the USA v. Apple.  CAFC oral arguments were held 08-Oct-2021.  The usual time for a CAFC ruling is 2 - 3 months. There are 3 cases in Germany on 3 separate Polaris Innovations patents.  The first case was heard on Oct 24th, with the remaining 2 scheduled for November 2021 and

[astutein]

Cabbie thanks for comments and clarification of some points. If all of ITS assets are placed QTRH ITS INC market will be able  to apply proper multiple of EPIDA to that Segment of QTRH. and not affected by Wilan.?? My point on 50 million is sitting in QTRH via earnings from Wilan.plus Q3   I agree fully with your time frames vs 6 month I mentioned and hope to get decisions soon.

[v_guerriero]

This is an excellent note Cabbie. You may not have seen but the house passed the infrastructure bill.  So the race is now on once Biden officially signs it into law.   It will take a bit of time for all the money to be made available, but I assume states have prepared a big backlog of ideas in advance of the approval.   A bid-ask spread on a divestiture is too wide without