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: JH who wrote (25349)	5/25/2000 11:54:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

John C. Hsu: Re Qualcomm and this thread. The best source of information on CDMA and Qualcomm (the most concentrated, comprehensive and up to date) is on the SI Qualcomm threads themselves - by definition. Tastes differ on which one to follow, but for starters you might try this link: Subject 29581 Your view from Hong Kong is particularly interesting since neither CDMA nor Qualcomm are as well known nor entrenched there (or in surrounding areas) as GSM. Therefore the general view is probably more GSM oriented. Curious when you expect 3rd gen to begin to be used commercially in Hong Kong or elsewhere in Asia. Qualcomm is very clear that any use of CDMA (or HDR) regardless of flavor will require royalty payments to Qualcomm. If so, Qualcomm will rake in royalties in China as the 3rd gen is installed from the suppliers of equipment to the major telcom mobile operators (including both China Telecom and China Unicom) regardless of whether the base has been GSM or CDMA. In other words, in royalty terms, it makes no difference to Qualcomm what flavor of CDMA is used in the 3rd gen. Can you cite any evidence to the contrary? Best. Cha2

To: JH who wrote (25349)	5/25/2000 12:11:00 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

John, I think that most of your comments are based on recycled rumors that have been analyzed and discredited many times over the past months on various Qualcomm threads. >> 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. A modest amount of dd on your part will dissuade you from that impression. A good starting point would be at cdg.org >> DDI is only a small player amidst a sea of DoCoMo's own WCDMA standard. There appears to be no substance to the claim that WCDMA is not covered by qcom's patent portfolio. Major infrastructure players, including Ericsson, Motorola, Samsung, Lucent, and Hitachi have contracted to pay qcom the same royalty rates on wcdma as they do on other cdma products. >> 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. Why are you defining Nokia as a telecom? They are a wireless equipment manufacturer selling to telecoms. In reality, the analysis I've seen indicates carriers must pay larger royalties on gsm products than on cdma products. uf

To: JH who wrote (25349)	5/25/2000 6:10:00 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

John, there seems to be very little evidence that the adoption of QCOM's version of CDMA ... is currently in a "tornado", with triple-digit growth. ... Thoughts (or numbers), anyone? Unfortunately, we can't use revenue as Moore would prefer to validate the existence of a tornado in Qualcomm's case. That's because the company was in a couple of businesses before divesting them to help foster adoption of CDMA products and because Qualcomm doesn't itemize the royalty and chipset revenue. Not having that, I rely on the the data at cdg.org which shows the adoption of CDMA. That data clearly shows that the rate of adoption has slowed from 276% annual growth in September, 1998, to annual growth of 101% in March, 2000. For me, that's a tornado that has been around awhile whose winds are gradually slowing. --Mike Buckley