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: qdog who wrote (672)	10/19/1999 11:01:00 AM
From: Peter J Hudson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12252

Qdog, I can't buy the fact that you are strictly a value guy. >>Realize that I invested in QCOM when it was undervalued, under appreciated, under followed, but still had the underlining dynamics that has driven it's value through the roof in a short period of time. IF the stock were to lose 50% of it's present value, would I buy it? More than likely, but at this value, no.<< You invested in Q when it had no earnings an unproven technology and an uncertain business plan. Hardly a value play. The Q at 200 is more of a value play than it was in 1995 at 20 or whatever. If you think Q is fairly valued at 100 but not 200, it just represents the multiple you are willing to pay for future earnings. I don't know if the speculation about 3G royalties are accurate, but there is a possibility that it's undervalued at 200. Pete