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 : Interdigital Communication(IDCC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (4313)	6/20/2000 8:58:00 PM
From: postyle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5195

carranza2, I thought you were here to learn more about IDCC - not bash the company on any and all levels? When the Chinese figure out that the transition to 3G is going to require that GSM be ripped out and new infra installed, they are going to go with the better 3G technology, i.e., CDMA2000. What you consider a sop will be quite substantial then. Where do you think IDCC will fit in this scenario? Hint: The fringes. I'm not going to predict what China is going to do. If they do decide to deploy CDMA2000 nationwide and end all of these games that are being played in the press, then I say great. IDCC, fringe player or not in CDMA2000, will stand to collect royalties in China. carranza2, understand IDCC is not a global powerhouse the likes of NOK, ERICY, or even QCOM. They are a small engineering company from a small town in Pennsylvania with an even smaller market capitalization. Even being a fringe player in 3G will amount to significant revenues. Of course, I don't believe they will be just a fringe player. They have essential IPR in all modes of 3G, and as Jim posted earlier, they lay claims to the lucrative air interface in WCDMA, which is made possible by owning essential CDMA and TDMA technology. Obviously, WCDMA has a backwards compatibilty element, and IDCC's TDMA patent portfolio is an integral part of the claims. Anyone who doubts this should contact Nokia or Ubinetics LTD. and find out why the Europeans have licensed their technology. Let's talk about IDCC's management. If we were to assume that all your wishful thinking about IDCC's patents were true, the obvious question would be this one: Why isn't IDCC making tons of money? The obvious (and only) answer: Management must be a bunch of clueless nitwits who are unable to cash in on the golden goose's eggs. carranza2, can you quantify (estimate) what would be tons of money for a small company like IDCC? Remember, IDCC has 53 million shares outstanding. If you don't believe they will be able to collect on their technology, or collect on ASIC sales, or continue to collect from existing TDMA licensees (whose front-end payments are now starting to become used up), then maybe IDCC isn't the "lottery ticket" you thought it might be. In any event, keep things in perspective. This isn't about IDCC vs. QCOM --or-- GSM vs. CDMAone. This is about a small company who has told the world they are growing, and have technology that has been incorporated in the next generation of wireless standards. They've had their troubles in the past, and past management obviously should be held accountable for some of that trouble. IDCC won't be the first company with a checkered past to taste some success. And it won't be the last.

To: carranza2 who wrote (4313)	6/21/2000 12:05:00 AM
From: w molloy	Respond to of 5195

>>When the Chinese figure out that the transition to 3G is going to require that GSM be ripped out and new infra installed,... This isn't strictly true. If one has a GSM network, the logical path to 3G is via WCDMA. The network model is maintained, although the air interface certainly changes.

To: carranza2 who wrote (4313)	6/21/2000 11:46:00 AM
From: Jim Lurgio	Respond to of 5195

Carranza2, You said: When the Chinese figure out that the transition to 3G is going to require that GSM be ripped out and new infra installed, they are going to go with the better 3G technology, i.e., CDMA2000. What you consider a sop will be quite substantial then. This news article of today tends to disagree with your line of thinking. Would they spend 3.48 billion US dollars this year on GSM and then rip it out in a few years? Think about it. Message 13916323 Unicom has since said it would focus on expanding its GSM system, spending US$3.48 billion on that goal this year.