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: y2kate who wrote (75722)	7/7/2000 4:53:34 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

I suppose we disagree, Kate. I see it a bit differently than you do. These FUD wars are old hat to the Q. Started with Frezza, then ERICY, then MOT, and now NOK. Each one of those opponents except NOK (for the time being) has been fully or partially vanquished. Remember that ERICY was in absolutely no different position than NOK when it settled. At some point, Dr. J. made a decision not to respond to the FUD because I assume he felt that a response would dignify it. That's fine with me, I understand the biz plan, and don't need to be reassured. Look, I don't mean to patronize but it really is ultimately quite simple. The Q has the IPR and is at least a year ahead in expertise on all flavors of 3G, which will be huge. Having ownership of the IPRs allow it to take a very hard-nosed position which can be mistaken for arrogance. The Q must and has taken such a position because to do otherwise is to not take full advantage of a legally-created monopoly position. Dr. J has stuck to his guns and I admire him for it. Telecom is not a charity and no one gives away their good stuff. Did Apple have the quality of IPRs that Q has? I think not.

To: y2kate who wrote (75722)	7/7/2000 7:22:49 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 152472

>> I don't expect Qualcomm's investor relations department or management to do what needs to be done to shore up perceptions of their technology and the effectiveness of their management. I think their ineptitude in this regard has become distressingly clear to everyone. Kate, the investor relations group is chartered to transmit prepared information to shareholders and respond to questions with soundbites from management. The PR group is chartered to develop relationships with editors so qcom can get free publicity when management or marketing develops a news release. Neither group is chartered with improving shareholder value; they are messengers for management. Anyone who went to the annual shareholders meeting knows our ceo is doesn't delegate when it comes to handing out information. Let's put the burden to counteract this fud where it belongs - squarely on Dr. J's shoulders. With tons of money in the banQ, and share prices dropping like a stone, I think a billion dollar stock buy back is in order in addition to quick clarification of qcom's position. I know Dr. J just did that recently, but it needs to be done again and VERY LOUDLY. jmho, uf