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 165.07

-1.0%

Nov 18 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (129544)	6/5/2003 6:52:49 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) of 152472

How about an on-topic post about QCOM or the price of QCOM, or a projection of where it's going? Personally I think it's going up in the short term and next to nowhere in the long term. Your motives are irrelevant to me. I've yet to see you discuss any of the technological issues that drive the price, have seen no evidence of a close examination of the market trends, no analysis of the things Q has in the pipeline, etc. To put it bluntly, you have exhibited zero knowledge of the things that a lot of us have taken considerable time and effort to learn. I dare say that most of the technical stuff is a mystery to you. At the very least, you have shown nothing that suggests otherwise. I'll grant you that you exhibit some understanding of the financial issues. However, that by itself does not give you a completely informed basis for making the kind of prognostications you make. It's only a part of the puzzle. Until you back up your opinions with some technical savvy, you will not be credible to a lot of us who have by dint of burning midnight oil have learned a part of the technical issues involved in this complicated game. You are controversial because most people lacking the technical knowledge you exhibit would approach the subject a lot more humbly. Instead, you hold bold opinions that are based on minimal substantive knowledge of the underlying technical issues. I've studied these things for years and don't claim that I've mastered them. Nevertheless, I'm fairly certain I understand the technical end a lot better than you do. Why should anyone who has put in the effort to understand these issues take your opinions seriously? Until you show some understanding, as far as I'm concerned you're merely a bit of a gadfly with an occasional worthwhile insight.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next