All the whining about QUALCOMM's approximately 5% royalties, but the GSM Guild has been holding off competition with a 29% royalty, for an inefficient technology. QUALCOMM could have been charging 100% royalty - as proven by the bids for spectrum.
$100 billion went to governments in Europe, $80 billion of which should have gone to QUALCOMM in royalties [unless it's really only worth $50 billion, but that's still a lot of money to some people]. NextWave's $8 billion in spectrum should have gone to QUALCOMM.
It has been the biggest giveaway in human history. A vast consumer surplus, captured by governments, to pour down the drain in socialist waste. QUALCOMM could have spent $100 billion on research, development and new Globalstar constellations.
Message 18500141
<Motorola agreed, with some exceptions. Simply put, this arrangement, after subsequent cross licensing by principal vendors, meant that no potential competitors, who were not party to this Musketeers’ Oath, “GSM for One, GSM for All,” whether from Europe or abroad, could supply GSM equipment.
According to Bekker et al (2000, p. 10-11),
“On the supply side, virtually all equipment was supplied by the companies that took part in the cross licensing scheme: Ericsson, Nokia, Siemens, Alcatel, and Motorola . . .. For suppliers, the participation in cross-licenses turns out to be essential to obtain a strong market position. First of all, companies who do not succeed in securing all the necessary licenses simply cannot make market products . . .. Secondly, those firms that do succeed in getting all the necessary licenses could be forced to pay a premium price for them. Sometimes IPR holders are only prepared to sell a full bundle of patents that in fact only contains a few essential ones. Our own research has indicated that the cumulative fee paid for GSM handset licenses is very high, and that was recently confirmed by the actor director of ETNO (European public Telecommunications Network Operator’s association), who revealed that royalty fees make up to 29% of the costs of the GSM handsets. Such prices make competing very difficult for companies that are not participating in cross-license fees.”
>
Mqurice |
