Are these just released $ figures from Acacia for real??
 

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. - Acacia is estimating between $1.1 million and $1.5 million in annual revenues from licensing deals already made involving its controversial streaming media patent claims, the company announced October 22.

But the company also reported a third-quarter consolidated net loss of $5,832,000, far less a loss than the $20.6 million it stated as a third-quarter 2002 loss.

"(We) entered into 16 new licensing agreements for?Digital Media Transmission technology and recognized $186,000 of licensing revenues during the (third) quarter (of 2003), which did not include third quarter license fees due from a number of licensees, which will be recognized as revenues when received in the fourth quarter," said Acacia chairman and chief executive officer Paul Ryan in an official announcement.

Twelve of the sixteen new license deals were made after the third quarter ended, Ryan said.

Acacia's third-quarter consolidated revenues were $367,000 compared to $179,000 for the third quarter of 2002, with this year's quarterly revenue coming mostly from the streaming media patent licenses and from Acacia's CombiMatrix division, the latter involving a DNA microarray synthesizer.

But Acacia claimed its media technologies group had $41.532,000 in total assets as of September's end, compared to $47,212,000 at the end of 2002.

All I can say is, what they claim and what their reports show are extremely different. Just like what Berman says his patent covers and what his papers say his patent covers.
Whoever dug into the Enron books should dig into Acacia's.

Acacia has over $6 million in operating expenses per quarter, they've got a looooong way to go until they so much as break even, let alone make a significant profit that would justify their $130 million market capitalization.

And technically.. that's not really that much money, if you think about it. Think about what some of the companies they are licensing are making, and compare it. They are pretty much small potatoes.

I just wonder why they have not been squashed yet then. :(

Lets use the number we actually have instead of their projection:


They made 186,000$ from license revenue from 53 licenses in the third quarter.

Thats whooping 1000$/month/company. If you remember that they signed Hustler, CE, etc... That a fucking joke.


They had net loses of $5,275,000, again, just for Q3

Thats 7326.38$/hour. Of loss, not expenses.


They look real good.....

the asset figure is what you need to pay attention to. Remember, thats waht determines how much they can borrow:2 cents:

correct me if 'm wrong but.........

unless they SUDDENLY get a HUGE influx of cash if the court cases last more than 2 years they're BANKRUPT.

I'm trying to figure out how $186,000 = $1.1 - $1.5 million.. may just be me but it seems a little off :1orglaugh

If all webmasters with movies should pay they make a lot $$ I think

you're wrong

Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments on a consolidated basis totaled $53,559,000 as of September 30

What are they considering "assets" when they calculate the $50,000,000?

Are they valuing their patents as "assets" or do they have real assets that make up the $50,000,000?