SI
SI
discoversearch

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 166.81-4.1%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: marginmike who wrote (24334)3/17/1999 2:37:00 PM
From: Ruffian  Read Replies (1) of 152472
 
Tero on Yahoo>

mmmmm...
by: tero_kuittinen
6519 of 6520
A 61xx knock-off is exactly what Ericsson doesn't need. That platform is already getting old. This display
thing is starting to get serious - the first stock quote, news headline and other value added services are
surfacing in America this year. And are supposed to be the big ticket in the European markets this spring.

There are two excatly opposite rumors about the Ericy-Qcom deal: one saying the end is near and the other
that the whole negotiations are about to collapse. I doubt anyone outside the companies knows the score. I
have a real hard time imagining these two companies reaching an amicable settlement. Ericsson wants the US
market to split in three when it comes to third generation standards and apparently that is what both AT&T
and the US GSM operators also want.

The longer the dispute drags on, the more likely the US market is to remain splintered. This would slow down
the introduction and acceptance of 3G in USA and the second generation situation might be replayed once
again. It must be tempting for Qcom to let the 3G dispute to drag on in hopes that they can then demand
higher licensing fees in exhcange of not blocking W-CDMA. As long as both sides think they might benefit
from prolonging the dispute, what's the incentive to make concessions?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext