SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The New QUALCOMM - Coming Into Buy Range
QCOM 180.90+2.1%Oct 31 9:30 AM EDT
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: John Hayman who wrote (9065)6/15/2023 4:56:17 PM
From: Lance Bredvold5 Recommendations

Recommended By
AlfaNut
Art Bechhoefer
John Hayman
Jon Koplik
petal

  Read Replies (2) of 9129
 
Could not read that. But wanted to shout at all the complainers on the moderated thread who simply won't understand that QCOM is not the companies they try to say it should be like. QCOM decided in 1987 it wanted to be an IP firm. When they needed someone to make phones in 1995, they built and sold phones. But soon others were forced to begin production of CDMA phones and QCOM sold that business to Kyocera and said they did not want to be a manufacturer. They did IP. Similarly when no others would build infrastructure to provide CDMA service, QCOM built infrastructure. But as soon as they got S. Korea to standardize the technology, the infrastructure business was sold to Ericsson.

So we enjoyed that rapid profit growth period from 95 to 2000 and benefited from a high PE for a few years. I've gone back to evaluate EPS in all the years since 1997 using EPS for 5 years (97 to 01) throwing out high and low years, and get EPS in 99 of $.30. 2020 is $5.47 (all splits accounted for). That's a CAGR of just over 15%. If the PE ratio were to stay the same over those years I would receive 15% plus some dividends. But the most rapid growth happened in the first few years. I then moved the beginning year to 2000 ($.39) and added the most recent EPS which gives me 2021 ($7.04). Again just under 15%.

That is sufficient for my standards. 15 or 16% return, over 1% per month for 21 years. QCOM has done that.

Though I first bought in 1997, I have one account where I began buying in 2010. I just calculated the price I paid with today's price of $124 and found that the shares purchased in 2010 at $33.73 compounded at 10.5% plus I got over 2% dividend on that purchase. But every purchase since through 2018 has shown CAGR of 14%+about 2.5% to 18% + 2.5%. I have no other investment in my portfolio that comes close to that over more than 10 years. Ely Lilly comes close over 10 but not over 20 or more. My purchases from 20-23 are not showing much profit yet--but I expect the same 20% before long. The most I paid was about $138 and the least $104.

So, why would I want to compare QCOM to the current designers/sellers of products going into data centers. Or to Apple growing stock price rapidly designing or building phones. We decided that's not what we want to do. We do IP and licensing and some chips. As an investor I'm content with my 16% to 18% while others seek quick gains and try to argue QCOM should be NVDA or AMD or AAPL. NO!!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News