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: qwave who wrote (6828)	2/24/2000 6:16:00 PM
From: foundation	Respond to of 13582

HDR riding atop GSM is the European wedge. First such contract announcement by NOK, or more likely ERICY, will signal sea change....

To: qwave who wrote (6828)	2/24/2000 6:38:00 PM
From: w molloy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13582

re What a load of crap Thank you for your thought provoking reponse. I had much the same response back in September '98 when I suggested that the Infra division was heomorraghing money and in April 99 when I suggested that the handset division would be sold off. At least Greg Powers was a little more polite. Regarding your first paragraph, you are essentially agreeing with my point regarding CDMA adoption being 'sponsored' by the US government. This scenario is quite likely, given that this is an election year. I believe the Chinese news is partly due to this. They are rattling the cage just to remind the US (and QCOM) what the stakes are. China needs us more than we need them. Rather presumtious of you, but lets put the big picture aside, since it confuses the issue.QCOM would dearly love to sell their ASIC's to Chinese OEM companies. In this case QCOM needs China more than China needs QCOM - which is what we are talking about isn't it? There have been numerous studies showing that CDMA is less expensive. These studies are based on assumptions regarding capacity. If you look at simply establishing coverage, GSM is cheaper. Development costs were amortised years ago. Of course, capacity is a trade-off when considering GSM vs CDMA, but is Capacity really an issue for the Chinese? Europe is doing pretty well without CDMA. CDMA phones are priced no differently than GSM phones. Which is why QCOM could not make any money out of their handset (or infra) divisions. Good network planning is necessary with either system. Network planning has to be much more precise with CDMA, as Australian Operators are finding out at the moment. w.

To: qwave who wrote (6828)	2/27/2000 5:00:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

<China needs us more than we need them.> Actually, 'us' is an approximate word. In general, unskilled people need skilled people more than the reverse. But rich people need poor people more than the reverse. Rich and skilled don't necessarily go together. In olden times, rich simply meant having ancestors who took control of land by force. Nowadays it's a bit more sophisticated. I'm not at all sure that China needs the USA more than the USA needs China. Who is going to work for you producing heaps of cheap stuff if not China? You'll have to pay some incompetent, lazy, overpaid, local slob a fortune to make your Nike's [yes, I know they are made in Indonesia, but you get the point]. I suspect the most accurate description is that each needs the other about equally. Which is not to say that either will just accept any nonsense the other tries to inflict. I'm Just passing through [briefly]. Yes Jon, I have unbookmarked Buy Range [I try not to make unfounded claims though predictions about the Dow are fine - anyone notice the Dow trending, belatedly, towards my June99 target]. No, some of my best friends are NOT King Salmon with lumps on their heads. Notice [Ramsey] how politics is now about the most essential aspect of CDMA these days? Remember how you used to lecture me about political rants, way back in 1996? Call me prescient! [Which is a popular word these days]. China has put CDMA on hold again - maybe WMolloy's claim that China would go GSM wasn't all a load of bad after all. Qualcomm [James Person - 1996] used to claim that network planning was a doddle with CDMA. Just drop another base station in place and the cells would 'breathe' their way into a new shape. Though it seems to have turned out to be more complex than that for optimum design. Mqurice