SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Thomas Mercer-Hursh who wrote (27345)7/6/2000 7:55:33 PM
From: Rick  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 54805
 
"To be completely fair, or just playing advocatus diaboli, isn't there also the possibility that someone else would develop IP that was crucial to WCDMA and that this would put QCOM in a compromised position, thus limiting its Gorilla status?"

My understanding of the situation is that many have already develop IP that's crucial to WCDMA, but it just won't work without Q's contribution. Period. On the other hand, nothing is needed besides Q's IP for CDMA. WCDMA is a hodge-podge. And as such will need multiple royalty payments. Of course, this will all be settle in court once someone actually tries to make WCDMA work commercially. What I don't understand is why anyone would think the Q will accept a lower percentage for the use of its IP in WCDMA than it would for CDMA.

- Fred



To: Thomas Mercer-Hursh who wrote (27345)7/6/2000 8:57:19 PM
From: Mike Buckley  Respond to of 54805
 
To be completely fair, or just playing advocatus diaboli, isn't there also the possibility that someone else would develop IP that was crucial to WCDMA and that this would put QCOM in a compromised position, thus limiting its Gorilla status?

Yes, Thomas. Depending on the nature of that IP and Qualcomm's IP, it could be a discontinuous innovation. As you know, Gorillas can be unseated only by discontinuous innovations.

--Mike Buckley