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: w molloy who wrote (1595)	7/29/2000 7:16:10 PM
From: JMD	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196644

monsieur molloy, a favor if you please. I'm not clear on 2 concepts (okay, maybe more than that but these are the only ones addressed in this post), to wit: "Separating the business will free it to make chips using standards that compete with the code division multiple access technology developed by Qualcomm and used by 65 million people. The parent company would continue to get royalties from CDMA patents and retain other businesses." Why did the Mighty Q have to become two little q's to stamp out GSM ASICs? If Dr. IJ thought it was time to hop into bed with the Forces of Darkness, why couldn't he just hire some GSM engineers and stick 'em side-by-pocket protector with the CDMA guys? Seriously, why in the world do you need a whole separate company to make different ASICs? And why does this arrangement skewer Nokia? Or anybody else that hasn't tithed with Q appropriately? How does this lessen NOK et. al. bargaining power? The whole thing seems so artificial: if I wanna buy CDMA stuff I go to San Diego and go to Qualcomm. If I wanna buy some WCDMA,GSM, or whatever, I walk across the parking lot and buy it from Spinco--who happens to be leasing a building that had a Qualcomm sign on it three weeks ago. Clueless and impoverished. TIA. SM