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: 100cfm who wrote (27354)	7/6/2000 8:53:53 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

CenturyMan, did you get my email? Please respond to it asap, or give me a call. Tried to PM this to you, but apparently I'm on your ignore list. Can't blame you for that <gg>. uf

To: 100cfm who wrote (27354)	7/7/2000 3:07:19 AM
From: FLSTF97	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

QCOM WCDMA Royalties So if one accepts the premise that Q IP is needed to execute the WCDMA system, then why can't QCOM totally derail the WCDMA if they do not receive the required royalties? From what I've read here, I believe that what UF wrote is fundamentally true. The GSM cabal found themselves boxed out and are trying to define a situation in which they can bring their IP into the situation in the hopes that they can leverage that in negotiations with QCOM. Strategically it seems weak, but sometimes a desperate feint is all one has. From a pure negotiating position it doesn't weaken QCOM's position, but rather it may give a way to find middle ground that allows the GSM pack to save face. The greatest risk to QCOM is that it will not prevail in the court systems. I would bet that the Europeans would find for their indigenous firms regardless of the logic. If you don't believe that, then review the silly process regarding bananas. Here even Germany tried to sway the EU gov. since the quota system tripled banana prices in their country. The WTO has found against them and still they ignore it. Want further proof? France currently has the Presidency (the position is tasked among other things with upholding EU rulings), but is itself in violation of legal rulings regarding privitizing their social insurance system. This will not be a pure commercial/legal decision, but rather a very charged political one. I think the recent Brazilian decision is the result of political pressure. China is nothing but politics. Since the US side has a losing track record, QCOM may want to find a middle ground solution, but should leverage their position as much as possible. FATBOY