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: Mike Buckley who wrote (24482)	5/10/2000 3:40:00 PM
From: Dr. Id	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

I disagree. QCOM can do joint advertising and enter into agreements that puts "Qualcomm Inside" labels on the outside of the phones. I will agree that to the extent Intel was limited by their distance from the user of the end product, Qualcomm is equally limited. I wish I could own more companies equally limited. :) In other words, Qualcomm is limited only if management doesn't successfully build and leverage their brand. So far, they haven't done that at all. I hope it changes. --Mike Buckley Mike, My Samsung Sprint PCS phone has the label "Digital by Qualcomm" on the back. So it does look like they are marketing their name to some extent. Dr. Id@qcominred.com

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (24482)	5/10/2000 4:24:00 PM
From: freeus	Respond to of 54805

rebuild and leverage their brand Well now, there's qualcomm stadium, broadcasting to the world (for this year anyway) or at least the part of the world that watches the Padres on TV when they play in San Diego. Freeus

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (24482)	5/10/2000 10:40:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

It's certainly theoretically possible for QCOM to pull off a marketing coup like Intel, but it's not likely IMHO. How man other companies have been able to do this? Off hand I can't think of any others in recent time. The idea of a superior microprocessor inside is a lot easier to explain and define than CDMA inside. Also they were smart enough to start doing this when almost all PC's had an Intel chip,giving repetitive exposure. This is hardly the case with CDMA and QCOM. Building and leveraging a brand isn't easy or cheap, especially if the consumer doesn't have the vaguest idea what it means and there's already a recognizable brand name on the phone. Why would the cell phone maker dilute it's own brand this way unless it thought the Qualcomm brand was stronger? I would like to see QCOM at least try this approach even though I suspect the odds are against them ,except perhaps with smaller cell phone makers or those without a good brand yet.(Samsung?)Even partial success would be a boost for them. None of this is to suggest that QCOM isn't a great company. It's sure made a lot of money for me in the past. But it's a question of "what can you do for me now "<<gg>>