Tero, re: QCOM's being headed for the toilet like IRID--isn't it a little ironic that you choose a top-heavy TDMA loser like IRID as a comparison to the Q!'s newly leavened fabless IPR powerhouse? Down here in Hicksville, we call that a bait-and-switch! Works well for product liability lawyers talking to illiterate juries, but from what I can tell, the jury is still OUT to a LONG LUNCH inre: QC's demise!
VLSI, you might have noted, is having their license pulled since they are getting bought out by a much larger manufacturer--perhaps prelude to a renegotiation of terms? In any case, obviously the sort of eventuality now obtaining in VLSI's case was anticipated in its licensing contract, and QCOM is simply exercising that right. Pray tell, where is the duplicity in them thar bones?
Also, surfing the web, picked up the following comments on your post from Yahoo:
Is Tero worth responding to?
by: Explorer_at_large (36/M/Southwest) 38447 of 38447
Let's face it, Tero has been spewing negative spin on Qualcomm since the stock was $15. The fact that Qualcomm doesn't manufacture the ASICs, the fact that ASICs are, in fact, a commercialized extension of the basic IPR, the fact that handsets are, in fact, little pieces of plastic, a battery, a keyboard, a LCD and...voila...ASICs/software....these facts are known to Tero, but he chooses to ignore them.
Tero better spend less time castigating Qualcomm and more time worrying about his precious Nokia. Let's face it, it's unclear whether Nokia is a manufacturing wonderkind or whether it has simply exploited the incompetence of its competition in the closed TDMA-based GSM universe. It's ironic that Tero should claim that Qualcomm has stifled competition, when the opposite is true. Qualcomm licensed the devils incarnate....the Japan and the Koreans....to 'do' CDMA. The principal TDMA-based universe is far less expansive, principally limited to Nokia, Ericsson and Motorola (with a big gap down for everybody else). With the Japanese now in the game, and the Koreans well along the curve, Nokia will face a degree of competition in 3G, i.e. CDMA-based technologies, that simply did not exist in TDMA-based GSM land. As a consequence, we will find out just who well our Finnish friends can defy gravity when they run headlong into fierce and well-financed competition...particularly while sputtering with a defective chipset. Given this dynamic, is it any wonder that the European equipment companies hate Qualcomm?
Tero is entitled to his opinion. It's been a rather expensive perspective over the last twelve months given the relative performance of the two equities. I suspect if my thesis is correct, Tero's biases will become far more expensive over the next couple of years. But what do I know?? EAL |
