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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ruffian who wrote (4751)	1/2/2000 3:26:00 PM
From: Drew Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

Irwin Jacobs was on This Week and was sorta interviewed by Sam Donaldson and George Will. Supposedly, they were going to discuss whether the NASDAQ could continue to rise at the rate we've seen over the past year. They asked Irwin whether Q's share price could go to $250 (the Paine Webber target of $1,000/4 for the split). Irwin tried to make points about the "exciting" opportunities, and that wireless was the future of communications. Donaldson jokingly (and condescendingly) criticized him for giving a "commercial." So why did they invite Irwin Jacobs on the show in the first place if they did not want him to talk about Qualcomm? They also had on an expert (and we all know about experts) named Grant (who was that guy, anyway?) who had nothing interesting to say either, but agreed with Donaldson about current valuations being unprecedented and unsustainable. Bubble economy, etc. Yawn. Heard it all before. Bottom line: Nothing of interest asked and nothing new said. Actually, the most interesting thing about the whole thing was yet another confirmation of Qualcomm's celebrity status. In that vein, yesterday I saw a full page ad (p33) in the January 2000 Scientific American for The Tech Museum in San Jose (http://www.thetech.org) with the headline, "CHANCES ARE YOUR KIDS HAVE NEVER HEARD OF IRWIN JACOBS. VISIT THE TECH AND HE MIGHT JUST INSPIRE THEM." He certainly inspired me.

To: Ruffian who wrote (4751)	1/2/2000 4:24:00 PM
From: quartersawyer	Respond to of 13582

Ruffian-- Smart Money writer Tiernan Ray's investment selections 8/1/98 to 4/1/99 (good vs. S&P, but no great shakes for the sector, notably QCOM absent, ERICY present) reesegroup.com

To: Ruffian who wrote (4751)	1/2/2000 5:50:00 PM
From: idler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

SmartMoney piece: <Already Korean electronics giant Samsung claims it has produced CDMA chipsets for shipment in mid-2000 that will support IMT 2000 and compete with Qualcomm. An excellent write-up in Electronic Buyers News tells of other challengers.> I believe we discussed the Electronic Buyers News article aways back and how the article misleadingly implies that Samsung won't have to pay royalties to QCOM for Samsung's chips. Tiernan seems to have fallen for that misimplication without reading the article too carefully. Nobody can argue with his basic point -- 10 years is an eternity in the tech world. QCOM can't just sit on its laurels, of course not. It has to execute. But Tiernan also seems to fall into the trap of believing "all patents are created equal." From what I've learned from the others on this thread, many patents are relatively insignificant. So the fact that some other company came out with a CDMA patent may be meaningless; another point Tiernan doesn't make.