If Qualcomm received over $6 billion in royalties last year from CDMA tech patents (dating back to the late 90s), how did eDigital fail in preserving their flash tech patents dating back as far. This still baffles me to this day.

Yes, I listened live on a macbook; however, using Safari wouldn't cut it. Firefox was the browser that I used.

BTW: does anyone know what happened to JimC and busybump? Old school names I had forgotten about...

I agree that the IFE line should be closed sooner than later as iPads, tablets, smartphones, etc. become more ubiquitous with "the consumer," and thus, "the flyer."

I disagree that holding an event like a conference call during trading hours means that it will bear mostly insignificant news. How many times over the last 6-7 years has Apple held a news/media "event" in which they have introduced something significant? Let's see: the iPod, iPhone, iPad, and various versions of their computers, laptops, and operating systems.

And the market moved on those particular days (actually mostly selling the news since there was a pre-announcement build-up and stock price appreciation).

Yes, I realize that I am comparing "Apple(s) to oranges" in terms of these two companies.

I also do NOT think that our stock will be soaring within the next week. This will take even more time.

Good luck, all!

Richardo, I agree with your statements or rephrasing of eDitital's pr statements. And while I also agree with your interest in realistic guidance every quarter and greater transparency (who wouldn't), that does not really matter without successful hearings, lawsuits, trial outcomes, and payments. Without these things, I'm not sure that eDigital will exist in a couple years.

Patience, please, for I am a first time poster.

I have been an invester in eDigital since '99, and I have read much from message boards (AOL back in the 90's, Raging Bull, Agoracom, and others) over the years - at times, learning a lot; at times, just listening to people insult each other and argue.

I am finally prompted to post with the recent Markman trial.

The way that eDigital's patent monetization strategy has played out over the last year or so has pleased me. After years of tinkering with different strategies and projects (some by choice and some by necessity), the company finally seems headed towards a simple and clear goal: getting paid for their Flash patents, especially considering flash's ubiquitous use in common, everyday handheld devices.

In a way, EDIG in 2010-11 has felt like EDIG of the late 90's - again based on creative technology patents with the simple goal: Flash in every product = getting paid for every product. Take away the dotcom mania and share price back then, and I still have the same hope with our 10 cent stock today.

I always come back to the one reason why I invested in the first place: Is EDIG the next Qualcomm? Yes, I realize that the original hype led to its the share price jump. And, yes, I also realize that Qualcomm was a bigger breed of company back then, and obviously it still is today.

But the fact remains that Flash is everywhere today, so might the Markman trial results and subsequent litigations get eDigital to where we thought it would be (just a decade late)? I hope.

Nonetheless, I counter that question with another, and this one still really bothers me: If eDigital's patents are so important to the tech world and consumer electronics, why haven't other companies offered to buy out eDigital knowing that royalties and liscensing can be a cash cow with no opereating costs, etc.?

What have I been missing all along? What am I missing now even though "I am here"? Thanks.--mL