Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) 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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 177.78

-2.2%

Jan 9 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (97091)	4/7/2001 9:02:54 AM
From: quartersawyer	Read Replies (1) of 152472

How is that fair? Wouldn't be... if it were done that way. It has to be across the board, and can be. Tax breaks, etc. The probable survivors of the debacle of course insist that their competition is being destroyed fair and square by the governments' fees, but pulling $100 billion out of the wireless industry for distribution out of governments' general coffers is bad for Qualcomm beyond "a few pennies". The potential costs of the delay of progress in building out 3G CDMA is, say 5% of 200 billion in infrastructure plus user devices for an extra three years. 10+ billion investable dollars right out of the gate (and the clock is ticking for Q's 3G technology). The European governments have nearly pounded the admittedly stupid golden goose to death. Maybe the operators were insufficiently trained in freely competitive conditions to hold their water in the bidding. In any event, a bad enough set of mistakes was made to absolutely threaten the industry, and that is bad for us. Didn't Perry La Forge say we need GPRS to work? I don't think that was tongue in cheek. He meant they need money to spend in our direction, no?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next