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: Clarksterh who wrote (46799)	11/1/1999 10:09:00 AM
From: puzzlecraft	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

Clark, Regarding QCOM W-CDMA intellectual property licensing, I called Qualcomm a couple weeks ago to ask them about this. Q IR said of the 70+ companies that have CDMA related IPR agreements with Q, 12 have W-CDMA agreements. When I asked about Nokia the response was something like... any company that wants to manufacture W-CDMA equipment to sell (not just demo units) will have to negotiate for a fair royalty rate. Also Q IR said something along the lines of: W-CDMA equipment will likely show up around 2001, this is why the number of companies that have signed up as of now is low. John

To: Clarksterh who wrote (46799)	11/1/1999 6:26:00 PM
From: Bill Dalglish	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 152472

Clark, Thank you for your thoughtful reply (post 46800) to the arguments laid out in: telecomtechstocks.com Obviously, we don't agree on the technical assumptions inherent in my distinction concerning Qualcomm's narrowband CDMA versus Ericsson, Nokia etc. and their wideband CDMA. Perhaps we can find some common ground by looking at the subject from a worldwide marketing perspective. I'm basing my comments here on the several paragraphs I wrote on the future of wireless marketing found at: telecomtechstocks.com First let me say that I believe that Qualcomm has tremendous expertise in marketing and anyone would be a fool to assume QCOM is underqualified in marketing any more than in PR (where they are brilliant!) I sense the ultimate question of QCOM's future profits from CDMA will not revolve around whose technology is objectiely superior (we could argue that forever), but whether QCOM with its CDMA2000 can outfox Ericsson and Nokia with their W-CDMA in marketing third generation wireless products to the world. Nokia, the largest cell phone producer today, and the major carriers are obviously going with W-CDMA because the intellectual property rights payments required with W-CDMA will be about 1/2 the cost of that required by QCOM. (And Ericsson and Nokia and others believe they CAN work around at least most of QCOM's patents) The race is on in earnest, with $ billions at stake worldwide. QCOM will need every bit of its marketing and PR genius to convince the major power brokers of the world to pay twice as much for QCOM's IPR's as for the IPR's of Ericy, InterDigital and others. I've personally underestimated QCOM before and lost money on that, so I don't want to get burned twice. My solution? Spread around my already realized investment profits and put some with QCOM, some with ERICY, some with NOK, some with InterDigital, GoldenBridge (if it goes public), etc. That way, when the marketplace decides (no matter what the ITU standards determines this month), it will be a win-win situation. I'm just not willing to put all my eggs in the QCOM 3G basket, no matter how well QCOM has performed in the past and how much money I've made from my QCOM investments. I don't know how much information we will find out from the ITU in the next week or two about decisions on the new standards. Maybe we'll find out only what the standards are and who is making claims of IPRs in those standards. (I had hoped we'd find an agreement coming out of Helsinki on exactly which firms would get what percent of the royalties, but that looks less likely this week than before.) I do know that there will be a lot of IPR claims made by QCOM, Ericsson, GoldenBridge and others. Even the relatively small InterDigital (IDC) has 50 or so IPR claims in the upcoming 3G standards and is racing, along with its alliance partner Nokia to get IDC IPR into the first 3G phones made by NTT in Japan next year. Rather than get bogged down by my writing more on the subject here, for anyone interested in a few paragraphs on third generation wireless and who will benefit from it, see: telecomtechstocks.com You mention the necessity for your being "rude" to me so that I'll stay away. Frankly, I seldom come over this way to post, simply to lurk. But i honestly believe that I am making some important info available, at least to help keep us all intellectually honest. At least that's what people from here are e-mailing me. It is important to the integrity of our non-commercial and "cookie-free" www.TelecomTechStocks.com web site that all the players in the telecom technology and equipment industry be treated fairly on the site I edit. A particular section on our site is devoted to Qualcomm, with its own "buttom" among the "industry leaders" near the top of the home page. Clicking that Qualcomm button leads one as follows: telecomtechstocks.com If anyone here has any suggestions to improve our site in reference to its treatment of Qualcomm or any other telecom tech firm, please let me know. I take your comments very seriously. Thank you! Bill Dalglish, Editor www.TelecomTechStocks.com bdalglish@aol.com