Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting 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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting

QCOM 170.90

-1.3%

Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (13373)	7/27/2001 10:31:26 AM
From: bruce_hamilton	Read Replies (1) of 196562

Mark wrote: <<My point is that the value of the assets on the books (other than cash) has little relevance to Qualcomms' intrinsic value. Sure you can impute a book value for the patents and add it to the existing book value. To continue my previous analogy, you could also add it to the temperature in San Diego. In either event, it's the value of the intangibles that is the important variable. The book value of the hard assets is mostly irrelevant. >> Mark, I will agree with you that the value of intangibles is very important in assessing value for any company. That was proven in 1998-2000 however, in the case of QUALCOMM one must place a value on the patent portfolio. The patents are real assets and must be quantified as best as one can. They are more valuable than cash on hand. Cash on hand can give us peace of mind but it can't guarantee future earnings like good old fashion IPR. The quality of this future earnings is why I think Art is giving QUALCOMM the book value of $20 plus. I happen to think his number is to low.... Bruce Hamilton Qcom Class of "93

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next