SI
SI
discoversearch

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 182.40+3.5%3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Craig Schilling who started this subject7/25/2002 11:33:38 AM
From: qveauriche  Read Replies (3) of 152472
 
The scary thing about the UBS report (available on the Moderated thread) is that he seems to be assuming successful 1x launches by V and PCS. I seem to recall that this inventory buildup matter came up at the last cc, and that someone, I think Thornley, rather convincingly (or perhaps not so convincingly)responded to those concerns. Does anyone else remember waht he said about this 3 months ago.

Another thing thats interesting is the analyst's apparent unwillingness to attribute any credibility to any upside guidance from mgmt., and also that he seems certain that the investment community as a whole will respond with equal skepticism. Short of the WCOMs, GXs, and ENEs of the world, its hard to think of any other company where analysts are as untrusting of mgmt. as they are of QCOM.

Is this level of distrust deserved? Has mgmts. guidance been more markedly off-base than the guidance from other companies? QCOM is one of the few big-cap techs that have made it through the telecom meltdown with earnings relatively intact. Are they truly deserving of this level of distrust, and if you think so, why?

Spare me any response that focuses on Schilit or options expensing. I continue to believe that for a company to have gone under the Schilit microscope and emerge with a diagnosis somewhat akin to that of a stopped up nose is a positive. not a negative. Give me something that would suggest that QCOM's management is uniquely dishonest, such that forward guidance should be rejected out of hand.

I would really appreciate a reasoned analysis of this topic if anyone cares to reply.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News