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 174.35

-0.4%

Dec 4 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: barty who wrote (143319)	7/5/2006 1:31:12 PM
From: BDAZZ	Read Replies (1) of 152472

>>Imagine the consequences if Samsung and LG both suggested they were considering whether or not to continue exporting CDMA200 products << This is easy. Their business would tank and they would be sued by their shareholders. Of course this scenario is as likely as if all of Nokia's customers suddenly decided to stop selling Nokia product. It is more than obvious that the QCOM WCDMA IPR is the "most" essential to the technology simply because it is present in the standard. The standard's board cheery picked contributions to get as much non QCOM technology into the standard as possible. The technology chosen in a large part is not essential to the technology, but essential to the standard created by this board. There is no way that the standard's board would have admitted any QCOM contribution if it were not of the utmost importance to the existence of WCDMA. Take away any other piece of the pie and engineers can work around it and still create a wide band CDMA async tech, and probably better than the present. Pull out QCOM's piece and there is nothing to work on, there is no standards board, there is no pie. Argue all you want, but in short the standard's board sees it that without CDMA this is no WCDMA. Barty, you're gonna have a tough time making a case to QCOM longs. You are another in the long line of those that have tried. It's the same tired stuff we've heard for years. Some of them were even pretty good, all of them said this is the big one, this is different. But your argument that short term market movement is proof that the QCOM position is weak has long since been rendered moot many many times in the past. If the Nokia position is so strong why has their stock been stuck at or below 20 for years now?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next