Interdigital Communication(IDCC) 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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC)

IDCC 364.82

-1.2%

Nov 10 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: CRay33 who wrote (4431)	7/11/2000 11:50:26 PM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (4) of 5195

Cray33, Thanks for posting the transcript. I listened to that interview 3 or 4 times and this is the part I would like to comment on. Interviewer: So you think from a revenue standpoint for QUALCOMM, it doesn't matter whether cdma2000 is the one chosen or WCDMA is? Jacobs: I think the most important thing to QUALCOMM is that people move to CDMA as quickly as possible. My major concern would be that in introducing a new technology such as WCDMA, the risks are a bit higher. The delays could be there and therefore we'd see a slight delay so that is a risk. But as far as people moving to CDMA, that's only a benefit from our point of view. Jacobs to me clearly walked around that question and never answered it. Qualcomm's PR department has commented many times that the royalty rates will be the same for CDMA 2000 and W-CDMA as they were for IS-95. It could well be true that they plan to charge the same % for their IPR but that wasn't the question. The question was from a revenue standpoint it doesn't matter if it's CDMA2000 or W-CDMA. Ericy, Nokia have been working on W-CDMA for a long time and IDCC also has been doing work on W-CDMA for Nokia. Can anyone honestly say these companies have no IPR for W-CDMA? Qualcomm has stated 27 companies are offering essential IPR for 3-G. If Qualcomm is going to get the same amount of revenues for W-CDMA then why did they even bother offering CDMA2000? I think it's only common sense that they would realize more revenues if CDMA2000 were chosen over W-CDMA. Jacobs had a perfect opportunity to set everyone straight on this issue and avoided discussing it. I don’t dispute that the Q has IPR in W-CDMA or that they are going to charge the same royalty rates. What I think is wrong is that most investors think the revenues the Q will receive from W-CDMA will be the same if CDMA2000 were chosen. The PR department hasn’t made that clear to their investors and now Jacobs avoids the question. I think for any Q investor to think Qualcomm will dominate the new standards as they dominated IS-95 is in for a big shock. Jim Lurgio

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next