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 137.31

+0.7%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (81160)	10/17/2008 3:45:06 PM
From: ggamer	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 197624

It does sound from the last sentence you quoted from Simonson that NOK was setting aside ("providing for") at a higher royalty rate than they ultimately settled for. One thing to remember is that NOK formula might have looked like this before the settlement: Total Bill = past royalties due + one a pre-paid license fee going forward The settlement formula was perhaps as follows: Total Bill = past royalties due + one a pre-paid license fee going forward - Patent Sales to QCOM - Long Term (15 Year) contract (no legal fees) - 4G royalties in the future - Possible ASIC contract - Possible joint ventures - Dollar hedging - GSM royalties from QCOM - etc. Perhaps the final value was lower than they had originally planned for/accrued but I am sure outside of dollar term all the other term also have cost and benefit associated with it.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next