Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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

To: John Walliker who wrote (35684)	7/19/1999 12:51:00 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 152472

it would be unwise to think that CDMA will quickly sweep away something that is good enough for many countries. It would also be impossible to handle the business. There is so much business out there that Q can hardly keep up with it now. As I have said before, the number one problem there right now is enough good Engineers.

To: John Walliker who wrote (35684)	7/19/1999 4:24:00 PM
From: engineer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Wasn't doubting this at all. It works, but "works" is a set of values that you make a choice on and decide what you want to settle with. GSM is good but it is not as good as CDMA for air effciency. It gave a great economic base to Europe and got the cellular business there booming. I have no problem with GSM as it stands. It was the best technological base that could be implemented with the DSP technology at the time. Technology moved on.... What I was reacting to was the statement that CDMA has not been proven nor does it work. Why doesn;t the guy stand on the street corner and repeat the famous line that "Man will never travel faster than 60 miles an hour and survive". Made by a train engineer in 1892.... If 35M subscribers have not "proven" it, then there is no hope for a person like that.

To: John Walliker who wrote (35684)	7/19/1999 4:28:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

GSM cost John, GSM might work very well, but it will NOT provide ANY 3G. The evolution to cdma2000 or W-CDMA has already been agreed by everyone [with some TDMA stuff there too]. The other important issue is cost. CDMA costs will come down as base station production capacity increases and competition increases. GSM costs can't come down significantly. Capacity of CDMA systems is much more than GSM systems, so for a given amount of electronic gizzardry and base station costs, a LOT more minutes can be provided to subscribers, so those minutes can be provided much more cheaply. That is why in a few minutes we are going to see some fun in the Q! world. Standby and watch some fun revenue and profits be announced. The stockmarket has already recognized much of this. See the graph for the past year. It would be unwise to hold investments which depend on GSM maintaining anything more than a legacy switching job. It might take 3 years to see GSM being evicted en masse from the air interface, because it will be that long before cdma2000 and W-CDMA are humming. It will take another couple of years to get production up to capacity after that. But stockmarkets predict things and investors will move their money accordingly. Meanwhile, S&P listing profits coming up in a few minutes. I guess a great improvement with the normal conservative profits pushed aside. Expenses will be deferred to next quarter, revenues recognized this quarter. Profit will be maximized to ensure the 4m shares are sold at a the highest premium. How about $1.14 per share pro forma or whatever you call it profit? Yes, that sounds about right. A super upside. That's 30c per share more than anyone = $50m recognitions and deferrals needed. Should be doable. As well as the outright genuine huge sales of ThinPhone, ASICs and all that stuff. Mqurice