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 174.01

-0.3%

Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Harvey Rosenkrantz who wrote (11155)	6/5/1998 1:10:00 PM
From: rhet0ric	Read Replies (3) of 152472

If one reads through Mr. Piekarski's statement to the end, the last paragraph talks about a desire for backwards compatibility to all modalities. Did Ericy see the light or is there more smoke in the tunnel? He didn't say "backwards compatibility." He said "smooth transition path": "However, as stated earlier, the standard must enable a smooth transition from all existing digital standards, e.g., TDMA, cdmaOne and GSM, to help protect all existing investments and the consumers who use the current systems for a number of years while 3G systems are being deployed." Not necessarily the same thing. If it were, there would be no argument. My prediction: the Europeans will concede IS-95 backward compatibility in exchange for a reduction or elimination in royalties to Qualcomm. Qualcomm's bargaining position will be determined by the stance of the U.S., which will likely back them (this whole thing is geopolitical, anyone claiming it's about the "free market" or the "best technology" is naive), the result will be an agreed royalty somewhere between zero and the current IS-95 fee, and the race will be on. rhet0ric

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next