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: Grantcw who wrote (25346)	5/25/2000 11:23:00 AM
From: JH	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

Thread: I've read plenty of posts on this thread on QCOM, but there seems to be very little evidence that the adoption of QCOM's version of CDMA (both the current CDMA-One and the future HDR)is currently in a "tornado", with triple-digit growth. Outside of Korea, the market for QCOM's version of CDMA is only a small fraction of GSM's. I don't have precise numbers, but judging from Hong Kong's market, CDMA is probably less than 10%, with GSM having 90%. Ditto for Japan, where DDI is only a small player amidst a sea of DoCoMo's own WCDMA standard. The mass adoption of HDR as a 3G standard is still questionable. If there will be several 3G standards dictated by the ITU, most telecoms will probably choose to migrate to the "royalty-free, non-QCOM" 3G standard. Not only would "royalty-free" be cheaper, but the alternative 3G standard will probably be a more natural upgrade path from GSM. Most telecoms seem rabidly against having to pay QCOM any royalties with respect to 3G. Many are instead choosing to either develop their own "royalty-free" version of 3G. Examples: Nokia's JV with IDCC to develop another version of 3G BCDMA. QCOM's dabbling in GlobalStar and NetZero smacks of desperation. Thoughts (or numbers), anyone?