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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quidditch who wrote (455)	7/7/2000 5:52:12 PM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 197603

Steven: Thanks. Learned from you. I misunderstood. Thought that the limit on open public comments was more restricted. Stand corrected. And pleased that is so. Best. Chaz

To: quidditch who wrote (455)	7/10/2000 1:21:12 AM
From: cfoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197603

Steven – Thanks for the explanation of what management can and cannot say during the quiet period prior to earnings announcement. Although Chaz was incorrect in the particulars, I believe he was on the right track. Unfortunately, there are two good reasons that QCOM's (or any company’s) management is at a distinct disadvantage in responding to attacks by the FUD-meisters. First, there is the problem of making “Forward Looking Statements.” We all know the pains that a company's management needs to go through before an earnings conference call to make sure their butts are covered legally with respect to forward looking statements. Analysts and reporters who have an axe to grind towards a company have no such impediments. They can say, “there are no earnings upsides for QCOM" (ala Mr. Snyder) all they want. It would be difficult, if not impossible for the company’s management to come back and say there are! Any such announcement would be frowned upon by the legal beagles and even if they could say something, they would have to go through the forward looking b-s which would kill the effect of whatever they had to say. The second, and more important reason I believe, is that no management wants to divulge their future actions whether tactical or strategic for the purposes of debunking FUD. Why should they tip off the competition? To answer much of the FUD effectively QCOM would likely have to reveal things they do not yet want to reveal. So while you are correct that the “quiet period” restrictions would not keep QCOM’s management from answering all the FUD, the above two are reason enough for QCOM to be very careful about what they do say and to mostly keep quiet.