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 169.45

-2.2%

12:23 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (118785)	5/14/2002 5:46:28 PM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) of 152472

Sure, some things maybe should or shouldn't be in the pro-forma as PCSTEL says. I don't think I said that! I have no problem with consistent Pro Forma reporting! The problem that I have with Qualcomm's Pro Forma reporting was the almost Quarterly realignment of certain operating segments first into the Pro Forma reporting scheme when there was a gain to be posted from it. And then the same segment being removed from the Pro Forma the next quarter when there was a Loss (Charge) to be posted from the same operating division. We had divisons that seemed to be created with alphabet soup and a spoon like QIT, QQQ, QRST and it was just a mish mash of trying to figure out how a given division was doing because it was included one quarter, and then removed the next quarter. Then they created the QPFLP (Qualcomm Pro Forma Loss Prevention Division). I have nothing against Pro Forma results to provide key metrics on ongoing operations that the company wants investors to focus on! But, let's keep it consistent from one quarter to another! Not the Shell Game that plagued Qualcomm Pro Forma reporting in 2001. PCSTEL

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next