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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (478)	8/3/1999 7:08:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

Re Motorola chip sales: Need to remind ourselves that while the Q is limited in production quantities for phones, that is not the case for ASICS. IBM and Intel have considerable capacity, no? The combination of having design by the Q which has the most knowledge and experience in CDMA air interface with production by IBM which, for example holds the rights to SiGe and licenses that to others, and Intel who capabilities don't need much emphasis, makes chip competition from Motorola - the shoot yourself in the foot company - less than daunting. Especially since MOT will need to pay royalties on every chip. Looks like story is more an excuse for a sell off than a real downer. Chaz

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (478)	8/3/1999 7:11:00 PM
From: quidditch	Respond to of 13582

Q/MOT/license/ royalties, on the fly: Trying to untangle what do seem to be incompatible cross-currents here: 1. From the Yahoo board, the ML analyst had this to say: In our view, today's weakness in Qualcomm can be attributed to comments originating from an analyst meeting hosted by Motorola. Management indicated that the company is preparing to sell CDMA chip chip-sets on the merchant market, thus becoming a direct competitor to QCOM... 2. Q and MOT are in litigation concerning their cross license agreements and Q has counterclaimed asking for declaratory judgment that MOT's rights under Q's licenses should be terminated because MOT is breaching terms of its license to Q, which makes Jon's otherwise sensible propostion: 3. MOT making ASIC chips to sell to others -- just to re-state an obvious point -- Qualcomm has to agree to license MOT to do this, or MOT cannot do it. If it is indeed happening, QCOM must have decided it was in the best interest of QCOM (and QCOM shareholders), or else they could have simply said NO... somewhat perplexing--why expand MOT's rights (unless MOT and Q are about to announce a settlement of their disputes) when Q is apparently trying to force a tactical re-negotiation of MOT's sweetheart license negotiated when Q had no leverage? 4. Which leads to another theory: ML's use of the term merchant market, as in independent sellers/vendors of components: Is the jist here that, although MOT pays Q a CDMA based IPR royalty, it is going outside the Q's ASIC design license and IPR and selling CDMA ASICs of its own, independent design? Does this make sense? Regards. Liacos_samui