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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: quidditch who wrote (32807)6/21/1999 1:30:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik  Respond to of 152472
 
Thanks for pointing out "it's important !"

I had skimmed that post very quickly the first time. (The old "Oh no, another long, boring, China-related post" syndrome).

Jon.



To: quidditch who wrote (32807)6/21/1999 9:13:00 AM
From: JohnG  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
 
ERICY, it can be induced, lied to China's telecom officials, just like they lied to everyone else, about the advantages of CDMA and whether it would actually even work. They lied to China to get their money. In the end they were forced to submit to QCOM, take a license, and buy technology from Q to survive. It can be assumed that the Chinese correctly interpreted the excellent results of their demo CDMA projects and more or less asked ERICY why they were trying to damage China by discrediting CDMA in favor of GSM.

At that point, trust was lost, and ERICY lost probably 95% of its goodwill in China. China remembers a bitter past of foreign Europeans exploiting them and beating them down. This emotion was part of the fuel that sparked the emotional reaction to the embassy bombing.

The point is that neither ERICY nor (IRID bungeling) MOT will be acceptable to help lead China to CDMA. Why not pick QCOM, who has no vested interest in particular CDMA infrastructure productes, and who has faced down the giant telecoms and scored a win for truth and science over lies and politics.

John G