<an old adage...if something seems to good to be true, maybe it is. jealousy, envy and downright anger are surely motivating many a varied & monstrous competitor to break q's apparent stronghold.>
I would like posit another way "enlightened" customers of QCOM, those paying royalties as well as the buyers of Q's chips, could look at and relate to QCOM. What if they take the view that QCOM is their research and development arm. Is it worth 5% of their revenues to have a resource for product technology like QCOM? Same for any premium on price of ASICs, especially newer ones like for HDR and new, even yet to be developed, wireless applications.
Looked at it this way, QCOM is really a partner, and maybe a damned cost effective one at that. And I think this is the way QCOM has been playing it, while at the same time sticking up for their IPR fiercely.
It seems to me to be a lot better relationship than has been had by many with MSFT.
Of course, if someone comes up with a wireless communications technology that's better than CDMA, that is different. But if QCOM/CDMA gives other companies the opportunity to do what they do best and take care of their stakeholders, it would be foolish of them to fight with QCOM vs. make money off of QCOM's technology.
On the other hand, jealousy, stupidity, egotism, and other even less attractive traits do abound in this [business] world of ours. |
