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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Boplicity who wrote (19644)	3/9/2000 9:24:00 PM
From: straight life	Respond to of 54805

The big problem now, and if I was Dr. J. I would be kept up at night worrying about it, is the vacuum and time it will take to get QCOM in the investors site again, could allow some other disruptive technology to come along and cloud QCOM future. (sic) I don't understand what you mean; you seem to be confusing QCOM the momo stock with QCOM the high-tech company. ps- Not that there's anything wrong with momo strategies; some of finest dancersImean investors I know achieve breathtaking returns using such strategies or so I'm told. If the stock is temporarily unpopular with momentum-oriented investors, how does that have anything to do with the possibility of disruptive technologies stealing a march on CDMA? Disruptive technologies are not very likely now, in my opinion, and become less so every day; as the heavy costs of switching infrastructure climb steadily higher. ps- not that there's anything wrong with momo strategies; some of the finest dancersImeaninvestors I know achieve superior returns using such strategies or so I'm told.

To: Boplicity who wrote (19644)	3/9/2000 10:24:00 PM
From: midwest5	Respond to of 54805

>and if I was Dr.J. I would be kept up at night worrying about it, is the vacuum and time it will take to get QCOM in the investors site again, could allow some other disruptive technology to come along and cloud QCOM future< I think people make the mistake that all disruptive technologies occur at a rate equal too or faster than Moores law. CDMA's development roots go back at least 30 years, full exploitation just recently became possible with the solid state device "state of the art". Clearly Dr J had the technical savy but more important he had the business moxie and vision to see the application potential.--- I'm not at all concerned with CDMA being displaced in the next couple of quarters.

To: Boplicity who wrote (19644)	3/10/2000 10:32:00 AM
From: James Sinclair	Respond to of 54805

The big problem now, and if I was Dr. J. I would be kept up at night worrying about it, is the vacuum and time it will take to get QCOM in the investors site again, could allow some other disruptive technology to come along and cloud QCOM future. I'm not too worried about that. At work I'm on the routing list of a number of highly technical journals that I used to pay a lot of attention to when I was in grad school but now don't have much time for. However, last month a couple of special issues of a communications journal came in that caught my attention. Almost every article was on CDMA. The papers' authors were from all over the world; communications vendors, academic institutions, etc. My point is that there is a tremendous amount of energy being spent in the research community on how to improve CDMA, and not just by Qualcomm. As long as the Q is able to defend its position that they get a royalty as long as CDMA is at the core we'll be fine.