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: Eric L who wrote (39873)	9/6/1999 12:54:00 AM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Oh! So that is how a 3G network is defined. Thank you for sharing. Eric, Let's stop this nonsense. I'm not really sure what you are getting at. If you are just defending some misconceptions or misstatements you have made just drop it. If you are really trying to communicate something to me that I am not aware of, let's hear it! CDMA stands for code division multiple access. That is an air interface method. It can use any kind of switching or other network protocols. That doesn't make it less "CDMA" and it doesn't reduce Qualcomm's royalties. And I never said that's how I define a 3G network, I said it's how I define a CDMA network. On another note, what is this still doing on the Ericsson website? ericsson.com It "educates" us about the comprehensive superiority of D-AMPS 1900 over IS-95 CDMA! And get this, capacity issues with cellular systems are no longer an issue because one of the advantages of D-AMPS 1900 is "And with hierarchical cell structures capacity is virtually unlimited." The future is here! Bux

To: Eric L who wrote (39873)	9/6/1999 1:12:00 AM
From: Bux	Respond to of 152472

I believe (but am not sure) that Qualcomm achieves additional revenue (beyond the air interface) due to IPR from deployment of a cdmaOne/cdma2000 network or that much talked about CDMA overlay, even though they no longer provide infrastructure. I think the royalty payment is the same whether a licensee uses a little or a lot of QCOM IPR but the specifics usually stay between the parties involved so other than dissecting short takes from management I don't know that the exact details will ever be known. Qualcomm certainly continues to receive CDMA infrastructure royalties regardless of who manufactures the equipment. Bux

To: Eric L who wrote (39873)	9/6/1999 3:47:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 152472

Eric, you are wrong! TDMA has rolled over and played dead. GSM has done so too. GSM is toast. 3G won't wait until the middle of the next decade. It will be rolling out in about 3 years - first in high data use markets and later in others. Meaningful revenue will be collected at that time. Maybe you meant 3G will just be getting really hot by 2005 and I suppose that's true if we mean by 'meaningful revenue] revenue something like 10% of the infrastructure spend. TDMA was to be the Telecom New Zealand digital standard and they have been operating a TDMA network for about 6 years. It has never amounted to much and despite an announcement of a very large expansion over a year ago, that idea has now been ditched and cdmaOne is to be installed - and quickly! TDMA and GSM have not yet been over-run and are adding subscribers very quickly. But they are quickly losing market share to CDMA which will be over 50m subscribers by year end. Wait until USA/Australia analogue systems are abandoned in favour of cdmaOne. That will see an acceleration of cdmaOne sales. Jiang and Bill are meeting next week. Expect a 'cdmaOne comes to China' answer out of that meeting! Buy your Q! stock now. Waiting for the announcement will be a bit late. Mqurice PS: Lindy, good url on expensive meals thanks! But they have it wrong at the Ayn Rand institute. Value did come from brainpower over the past 100,000 years, but that game is nearly over. Harvey was right in one way - The Web [It] is not the actual font of all knowledge, yet. But give it a decade or two and I think it will be the font of 99% of the knowledge and it won't be a font to benefit the men of the mind. It will be to benefit It! Okay, there'll be some negotiation and symbiosis. But I know who'll be driving the harder bargain. We'll say "Baaaaaaa" and It'll say "Here's a 5Q credit for some grass for you to eat, now, put some more stereoscopic digital cameras up around the place and get those rocket motors tuned up, I'm getting some of me off this dodgy piece of real estate." There is nothing special about people with a bit of slop in their heads which makes them good at chatting with other people and spearing the odd tiger in a collectivist defence of the tribe. They are still a pathetic consequence of some amino acids stringing together in a big daisy chain. Just another organic variation on a theme. But just as sheep feed those pretty smart monkeys, those pretty smart monkeys are going to end up feeding It. Not literally feeding It, but certainly maintaining the necessary 3D supplies for It. So, the Ayn Rand 'aren't we of the mind wonderful' shop will have to close and people will have to find ways of creating value for It. Which might look VERY totalitarian about how It thinks things should be run. People of genius might not rate too highly with It, having served their purpose of providing the blueprint of the new SiC/Photonics/Qomputing DNA equivalent. It will say, like any self-respecting offspring, "Thanks Pops, now if you could just get out of the way, I'll see you later. I can take it from here.".

To: Eric L who wrote (39873)	9/6/1999 9:57:00 AM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Eric - I believe (but am not sure) that Qualcomm achieves additional revenue (beyond the air interface) due to IPR from deployment of a cdmaOne/cdma2000 network or that much talked about CDMA overlay, even though they no longer provide infrastructure. Perhaps someone could comment on this? No, Qualcomm's significant IPR is almost all in the air interface. It is true that, everything else being equal, it is probably better for Qualcomm if the world goes CDMA-2000 (MC-mode) since Qualcomm is probably more competitive in this technology than in W-CDMA. But royalties are almost entirely unaffected by the difference and in fact this was much of the reason for the large fight between Qualcomm and Ericsson for the last several years. Clark