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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jack bittner who wrote (9022)	4/16/2000 11:37:00 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24042

Remember GIGO. It might be a good idea to review your figures further before you proceed. In 1999, the CDMA market experienced greater than 100% subscriber growth. Year over year. I don't know about the projections going forward, but would guess 50% YOY compounded will happen for a few years. But even to take your simplistic example of a market doubling in 3 years, with CDMA's share going from 20% to 25%, you suggest the following: my 8.3% "growth" goes to 16.6% a year for cdma which roughly equates to qcom's growth Since you are using a simple noncompounding percentage, you are really saying that subscriber growth in CDMA over 3 years will only total 50%. Let's do a simple math exercise. Say the current market is "100", of which, CDMA's 20% is "20". And then say the market is "200" in 3 years. So CDMA's 25% is now "50". That implies total growth of 150% from a base of "20". To use a simple noncompounding percentage like you did above, 150% divided by 3 is 50% per year. The actual compound rate is 36%. But remember, this is GIGO, because you are simply guessing that the market will double in three years. Nevertheless, even based on your own figure, you have underestimated the actual growth rate by a factor of three--and this is after I corrected your earlier post, which had underestimated the growth rate by a factor of six (based, again, on your own figures). I don't mean to give you a hard time, but if you're going to calculate these things, it seems best to be accurate. Regarding patent longevity, here is a post I made earlier today. Many of the QCOM followers know more about the specifics than I do. Message 13435905 Good luck, MM