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: JGoren who wrote (72931)	5/31/2000 7:11:00 PM
From: 100cfm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

China is looking at 12 infra bidders now; when China asks NOK what have you got that can meet 1x or HDR, NOK will have to face reality and capitulate. Judging by NOK's recent stock performance it doesn't seem like anybody but us think they will be capitulating in fact it looks like the exact opposite will happen if q's stock price continues to get crushed. Even the revelation of GPRS being a technological joke had no effect on NOK. If the equivalent came out about Q's cdma, we would have been cut in half. Either Q or NOK has a few aces up their sleeves, I'm beginning to wonder if it's NOK and not Q.

To: JGoren who wrote (72931)	5/31/2000 8:02:00 PM
From: A.L. Reagan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

If we can get through this tumultuous period, we will be able to say "I told ya so" in a year and will be richly rewarded. John, AMEN to your focus on fundamentals! (But let's remember next time when we get there to take some of the rich rewards in $$$, even if it means paying Uncle Sam.) -------------------- Re: posters wondering about how DS-CDMA can be rolling along when IPR issues not fully resolved. Look at it from other guys point of view: 1. Worst case gross royalty to QCOM is +/-5% while its fundamental patents are effective. "Fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory" etc. This is resolved, so one can certainly go ahead and roll-out DS-CDMA knowing the worse case scenario. 2. Other guys have significant "implementation" DS IPR that Q does not have. 3. Worse case (from other guys view) DS ends up with only 70% of worldwide market for ASIC's. Best case, their view, close to 90% if FUD and market-buying campaigns are successful. 4. There is a lot more 3G gross margin money worldwide in ASIC's than in royalties. 5. Qcom will have to x-license to sell DS ASIC's designed to the adopted standard. 6. Do the math. 7. If Q doesn't play the DS x-license game (meaning it is out of 70-90% of the worldwide 3G ASIC market - thus unlikely), "workarounds" Q's IPR almost certainly will infringe, but the claims can certainly be litigated, which will pressure Q to some extent. So that's the game. It is not about pure IPR royalty rates, but the net money effect in the ASIC business. Do the math - it is not hard to pro-forma the 3G CDMA ASIC business split between MC and DS, handset royalties, etc. It is true Q will win incrementally regardless of flavor. But it wins a lot less when you model 90% DS marketshare versus 70%. As we've seen in China, there aren't likely to be any new IS-95B systems, so you have to model the transition of the MSM product line, as well as what QCOM's likely marketshare in ASIC's would be between DS and MC modes. While 70% versus 90% mightn't seem like that big of a deal, 10% versus 30% from Q's viewpoint certainly is. So, the real fight is over who sells how many ASIC's and at what margins (net royalties included), and who controls future standards development, not simply over DS and MC CDMA royalties. They are interrelated, but I think some of the newer posters are not looking at the issues correctly. And I think it is a gross simplification to think that just because the Q has the best IS-95 ASIC's, that this means they'll have the best in DS. Unlikely. And, of course, the longer legacy systems like GSM and TDMA can be dragged out, the better for those who control them. So, when you are beFUDdled, look at this from the other guy's viewpoint. There's a lot of rational business strategizing going on here, not simply "politics" or "nationalistic pride" - although those weapons will be certainly employed in the fight.