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: tekboy who wrote (71184)	4/25/2000 8:37:00 AM
From: Eric L	Respond to of 152472

Tek, Re: Greg Powers (EAL) Yahoo 'best' on Qualcomm Thanks for culling these posts. << would've been nice to get his take on the story as it moved forward >> Sure would. - Eric -

To: tekboy who wrote (71184)	5/15/2000 12:49:00 AM
From: Ruffian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

One Of My Favorites By EAL> Truly powerful investment opportunities are rare. Few technology companies transcend a short-duration product cycle...and rapid growth is so often followed by equally rapid decline. True stars, like Microsoft, Intel and Cisco, hold an enduring franchise position that allows them to leverage rapid growth into extended financial performance. I believe that CDMA, and Qualcomm's IPR position with respect to CDMA, has created a financial platform of potency equal to the aforementioned jewels. Over the last decade, there were precious few periods where MSFT and CSCO were anything approaching statistically cheap, just as it is unlikely that Qualcomm will ever again be statistically cheap. Given this, those with the foresight to understand the technology position, and the economic opportunity associated with it, will spend precious little time debating 'at what point' to buy and/or sell Qualcomm. What is relevant are factors that could displace or replace CDMA. That, however, is the beauty of wireless telecom...since the infrastructure investment is so long-duration, and switching costs so high, carriers are very very slow to adopt new technology. GSM remains the bain of the worryworts. I look at GSM's continued vibrancy as a confirmation of the longevity that will accrue to CDMA. Since TDMA-based GSM cannot deliver sufficient capacity to compete long-term with CDMA, as is demonstrated by Ericsson's and Nokia's decision to move to W-CDMA (aka direct sequence), the inflection point is inevitable. In the meantime, many carriers feel tactically locked in to their TDMA-based GSM networks. When the transition occurs, they will feel similarly locked into to their brand spanking new CDMA networks.