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: Kayaker who wrote (5873)	1/29/2000 1:30:00 AM
From: Kayaker	Respond to of 13582

1/25/00 Conf Call 2000 Q1 Earnings - Selected Bytes - QCT Decline/Rebalancing 2000 Q1 Earnings Conference Call 1/25/2000 Section 4: Question & Answer Session (47 min. 28 sec.) corporate-ir.net Timemark: 21:05 Question: I was trying to get a better understanding of factors that you mentioned for the QCT sequential decline. When you say inventory rebalancing, what exactly does that mean? Why are people rebalancing their inventories? QCOM: On the rebalancing of the ASICS again, it has a lot to do with other components' availability and whether or not [he stopped mid sentence, then] there still is this shortage out there so people are rebalancing from that point of view. That's one aspect at the manufacturing level. And at the carrier level, I know there have some carriers trying to carry less inventory, if you will, and rely upon their suppliers more. And so, those 2 factors are what really have been driving this issue of rebalancing. IJ: I think that with more suppliers of CDMA phones now available, the competitive situation has heated up. I think the carriers are in somewhat better positions and are therefore planning to not have as much lead time on their purchases of phones. And so we're seeing it this quarter. Hopefully that is a short term readjustment phenomenon.

To: Kayaker who wrote (5873)	1/29/2000 1:45:00 AM
From: DWB	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13582

So where do we and QCOM stand after this latest week of trading? The following seem to stand out for me... 1) Sure seems to be a lot of second guessing of the management team that could do no wrong only about a month ago... As is usually the case when people are temporarily losing money, this perception is way out of whack. I'm of the mind that Irwin and company have QCOM's best interests first and foremost on their agendas. If the course they are charting causes some of the mo-mo crowd to yelp and go to the corner to lick their wounds, so be it. 2) The word "slump" seems to have taken on the properties of a powerful demonic magic... having the ability to cause usually sane people to throw their logic to the winds. I don't know that I've ever seen so much whining about a single word, relative to the real-world performance that QCOM is turning out. Forgive them lord... for they know not what they do... 3) If there has ever been a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, QCOM's stock performance for the last week fits it to a "T". I find it extremely hard to believe that all this angst, pain, and suffering is taking place in the face of the ongoing communications revolution, even if there is a 2G to 2.5G product transition currently underway. It's as if the people who own QCOM stock suddenly stopped focusing on the potential 2 years from now, and will now only pay for the perceived worth of activity for the next 2 months. The longterm investor "vision" that most pride themselves upon versus the current myopia, would be like going from the investment equivalent of the Hubble Telescope to Mr. Magoo. I see a lot of Magoos running around on the Q threads these days, and very few Hubbles. Just to test everyone's vision, this is the QCOM future the Hubbles can now see... antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov ... and this is what the Magoos are seeing... dogfeathers.com Please feel free to adjust your investment vision accordingly... 4) If the axiom that "Wall Street climbs a wall of worry" is anything close to true, we've got a nice vertical incline staring us in the face. 5) Ever notice how all of the good news gets ignored when stocks are going down? The Snaptrack purchase got almost no play whatsoever despite the potentially huge revenue stream that JGoren's message alluded to. By my calculations, the news that Toyota is going to use GM's OnStar system (which again will most likely benefit QCOM) got 0.0000001 nanosecond of attention (give or take a nanosecond). Guess it is hard to think straight when you're using your credit cards to buy margin for those naked calls you bought on the MonkeySpank.com IPO. 6) Like I said in an earlier message... if QCOM was driven down, and you weren't sure about the next couple of months, I suggested buying 2002 LEAPS and going to sleep. That's what I did today, and got what I consider to be a bargain relative to what they were asking me to pay just 2 weeks ago (2 weeks ago, the 150's were around $53. Today, the $115's cost me $42). 7) I wonder how this will affect attendance at the March Shareholders meeting. Maybe I'll have a lot more room to stretch out in the Symphony Hall now... be able to put my feet up on the back of the chair in front of me... That's all for now... everyone got a supply of canned meat and bottled water to be able to outlast the fallout? As for me, I'm going to teach my 3 year old daughter to rollerskate tomorrow at my 7 year old's birthday party... DWB Q2.5K/Y2K+5