Zi-Corp (ZICA), formerly MCUAF Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Zi-Corp (ZICA), formerly MCUAF

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: RockyBalboa who wrote (1537)	9/27/1999 9:08:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	of 2082

One has to question that, when the technology is so important to Ericy, why did Nokia, Mot, Bosch, Samsung not go after it. who said the technology was 'so important' to Erickson? Personally I have no idea how important these products are to E. The other companies chose the technology they did for their reasons and I have no view as to their reasons and the soundness of their decision process. the point is, imo, that the corporate connections are besides the point now. As I said in my earlier post the Erickson deal is valuable to Zi because it gave them revenue to keep them alive. But they weren't going to prosper with that deal alone. It is the deals with the Chinese gov't that is the key to Zi's future. Before the gov't deal I would agree that Zi was in trouble. In fact I suspect Erickson was dragging their feet on product release because no one else was adopting the technology. I have no hard evidence for that view just a hunch. The deal with the Chinese gov't changes everything, imo. And has the Chinese ban on "new" internet investment some negative impact on Zi? I don't think so. It is possible as the government's 'partner' it puts them in advantageous position.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next