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: rhet0ric who wrote (11190)	6/5/1998 3:50:00 PM
From: Gregg Powers	Read Replies (3) of 152472

rhetOric: I don't think IS-95 is likely to get orphaned in either case. Just like IS-136 has persisted, despite the head-to-head warfare between GSM and CDMA, IS-95 has a large installed base throughout the Americas (and Asia) that is already quite large and expanding rapidly. Also, remember that W-CDMA wouldn't even be commercially available until 2002 to 2003 while wideband cdmaOne would be available to the IS-95 community two, maybe even three, years earlier. You also appear to be presuming that W-CDMA is somehow superior to IS-95C. It isn't. That's kind of the whole point. So assuming Ericsson gets its way, the European community will get to wait two to three years for a proprietary CDMA standard that is no better than they could have now...but ERICY would have probably killed Qualcomm's efforts to overlay IS-95 style CDMA in Europe. All of which points up a major weakness in the Ericsson strategy... If QC holds firm and refuses to license its IPR on unfavorable terms, the IS-95 community can continue to sell its product worldwide while ERICY's proposed standard could wind up tied up in litigation for the foreseeable future. Ericsson would have blessed CDMA, and admitted its superiority to TDMA-based GSM, only to find itself incapable of selling products based on its proposed standard or spending years trying to circumvent QC's IPR. All else being equal, operators that are extremely concerned with pan-European roaming would lean toward whatever Ericsson proposes. Everyone else would be left looking at a highly robust (and available) CDMA standard in IS-95, with a growing worldwide footprint and dominant North American share. It's really pretty simple. If Qualcomm really felt threatened, it would have adopted a more conciliatory position and probably licensed its IPR already. People seem to continuously miss the point that Ericsson is actually fighting to get Qualcomm to license its technology--the debate is simply over the terms. This should be cause for celebration rather than a source of consternation. Oh well. Gregg

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next