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: jack bittner who wrote (65245)	1/30/2000 7:43:00 AM
From: marginmike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

look I am not paid to educate you, go back the last year and read Gregg Powers posts and youll understand what I am talking about. regards

To: jack bittner who wrote (65245)	1/30/2000 8:56:00 AM
From: TCGNJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Jack, Do you have earnings projections data? I am getting about 30% out to 2001. dailystocks.net Thanks. TCG

To: jack bittner who wrote (65245)	1/30/2000 5:30:00 PM
From: q_long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

It cant help but to chime in on your comments to Mar. Mike excerpt from your post.. "... a buildout in GSM is a future CDMA sytem" why don't they build it now in cdma? you think it's less costly to build gsm first and then convert to cdma? who says the chinese will convert? what made them decide to use gsm?..." What Mike meant is W-CDMA is the 3rd generation migration path for GSM operators. Much like CDMA 2000 is the 3G migration path for IS95 CDMA (current version). This was assumed, as it has been widely published over the past year. The fact is GSM operators will use CDMA WHEN operators currently using GSM migrate to 3g or W-CDMA. WCDMA is already the standard agreed on by GSM operators worldwide. They (GSM & WCDMA operators) will pay QCOM for it's intellectual property as determined in the landmark March 25th settlement between ERCY and QCOM. So as for the "holes" in your post do a little more homework before attacking someone who demonstrates a better understanding of the QCOM business model than yourself.