Tero, I'm surprised you still have the nerve to continue to post your pro-european, anti Qualcomm propaganda.
Qualcomm spent 1998 trying to force W-CDMA to abandon the chosen chiprate. Nokia and Ericsson spent the year working on W-CDMA development with the chosen specs. Time will tell which approach was more productive.
I'm not going to waste my time looking up all your old garbage posts but in 1998 you were so sure that the share price of nokia would crush Qualcomm that you stated it almost as if it were fact. Looking back, we can see that nokia has appreciated about 125% over the last 12 months, that's a good return. But in that same period of time, Qualcomm has returned 250% and the future of CDMA is looking brighter than ever. You are locally famous on SI for saying "Time will tell" but you never mention it when time eventually proves you wrong.
Tero, your best qualities are that you write well and you write convincingly. Unfortunately, you are so jaded that you fail to see reality and your well-written posts are not only useless for investment purposes, they are dangerous to those who take your word as gospel. I feel for the otherwise intelligent people who were persuaded by you to not invest in Qualcomm last year. The fact that you are still coloring and interpreting the facts to suit your bias for European companies shows that you do not learn easily from your past mistakes.
Qualcomm is the cellular gorilla with all the important CDMA patents and associated royalties. No one is going to take that away from them.
I have one question for you. Let's see if you can answer it without being evasive. If Qualcomm is not important regarding W-CDMA, then why will QCOM receive far more royalties from the future sale of W-CDMA equipment, chips and phones than any other company in the known universe?
Bux
|
