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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Lurgio who wrote (386)	9/25/1999 10:04:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Respond to of 12233

Re : lack of us telling the "creeps" : "NOT TRUE !!" repeatedly (with regard to CDMA/TDMA/GSM or Qualcomm or whatever). I have spent a lot of time thinking about the whole issue of -- if you are pretty sure you are correct, and "they" are wrong (note to SI members - check out my SI personal profile) about something, is it necessary or productive to spend your own time painstakingly correcting misinformation ? (This is also a personality thing. It is very hard sometimes to remain silent when someone is "mouthing off" idiocies ...) When our favorite stock was about $25 (adjusted for split), some of us worried a great deal about some "evil" company attempting a buyout of QCOM at a (then perceived) "high" price of $40 or $50, thereby robbing us of the chance to capture the eventual move in QCOM. It was a legitimate fear, I think. I personally used to type in SI posts from time to time (with my blood pressure raised), thinking : "I will NOT let that person's comments go unanswered !" (Anyone remember my post about Goofus and Gallant each find $800 million while digging holes in their backyards. Goofus decides to build a TDMA-based wireless system, Gallant decides to build a CDMA-based wireless system ... ?) Anyway, now that Qualcomm has a market capitalization of $25 Billion (or $30 Billion or whatever), it is possible that we could maybe relax a little, and let some of the short seller agents' (or just plain stupid peoples') comments go unanswered. If the short sellers want to sell short QCOM, let 'em do it ! (The only ethical problem with ignoring the lies is : some neutral party might be influenced by the bad information). Jon.