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: GO*QCOM who wrote (57373)	12/29/1999 8:51:00 AM
From: DepyDog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Good grief, If we are dreamin here, no pinchin.WOW. Ok, is the Market open this friday? TIA, Dep

To: GO*QCOM who wrote (57373)	12/29/1999 8:54:00 AM
From: HECTOR RUBERT	Respond to of 152472

Happy New Year everyone....I will never sell Q!!! In at 368....and will never sell my Q unless we have a Microsoft market cap....WIRELESS is the world ......Im just another Quillionaire in the making.... God Bless America, God Bless us all, and God Bless our beloved Q!! Hector

To: GO*QCOM who wrote (57373)	12/29/1999 8:55:00 AM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 152472

Wednesday December 29, 8:46 am Eastern Time Alert: Qualcomm Shrs Soar to 578 in Pre-open Trade From 503 at Prior Mkt Close (NasdaqNM:QCOM) (This is a headline-only alert, although it will likely be followed by an article soon)

To: GO*QCOM who wrote (57373)	12/29/1999 9:12:00 AM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I know that Q does not need CNBC. But that was one of the most unprofessional performances I have seen. They even alerted the viewers before hand that they were going to discuss Qualcomm. Then, when they brought it up, they said this was an example of a lesser analyst trying to make a name for himself on a slow day when nothing else is going on. They compare his estimate with estimates for CMRC, as if the two companies have anything to do with each other. Finally, they stated the analyst's reasons for his estimate, including 85% of phones within ten years using CDMA, a $20B royalty stream to Q, etc. They did not counter any of that; instead, they went back to discussing liability suits if the analysts are wrong. I realize this is TV, and has little to do with reality. I also don't mind if they have negative things to say about any company, including Q. If they disagree with a 1000 target, let's hear their reasons, we can all benefit. But to do an ad hominem attack on an analyst only because they don't like his forecast is childish, boorish, and unprofessional. As I have said many times before, the only good thing about CNBC is Maria Bartolomo, but you've got to turn the sound down.