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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Keith Feral who wrote (8278)	11/27/2000 9:34:24 AM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

Re: Pete Peterson on 3G >> TELECOM'S NEXT FRONTIER - THE LONG AND WIRELESS ROAD - ONE FARSIGHTED NAVIGATOR WEIGHS IN Carolyn Whelan Pete Peterson Fortune 27/11/2000 Pete Peterson isn't a household name. But his stellar track record might change that. The Prudential Volpe wireless equipment analyst rated Nokia a buy in July 1997, back when few had even heard of the company. He also blessed Qualcomm with a strong buy in mid-1998, when the stock was trading at $6. (We'll pause a minute to let that one sink in.) Now the 36-year-old Peterson, an engineer by training, is tracking so-called third-generation, or 3G, cellular-a novel and controversial wireless data technology that, to hear the pundits talk, could soon have us watching South Park on our cell phones. FORTUNE caught up with the analyst at his San Francisco office to get the skinny on 3G after the recent telecom selloff. What exactly is 3G? The United Nations' International Telecommunications Union uses the term to describe two main technologies it endorsed for better mobile performance: Qualcomm's CDMA2000 and the WCDMA standard that will soon be used in Europe. But you'll often see the term applied to any wireless technology that significantly increases capacity and capability and decreases cost. That also means more phone calls on a given network, right? Yes, 3G offers about 30 times what a conventional analog network provides (and nearly four times the capacity of Europe's current standard, GSM). Data rates of 2Mb per second [2Mbps] are also 200 times faster than GSM. That will make cell phones more ubiquitous and increase usage, since it also allows for the same capability at far lower costs. While you may not be able to browse the Internet at breakneck speeds-and you'd be limited by the phone's screen size and battery life anyway-you should be able to get personalized local content such as music and news, local weather and traffic reports, mobile maps and games. (Handsets in Japan already offer animation.) Then there's the fact that the connection is always on. That's important. Callers complain about waiting too long for WAP [a wireless Internet standard that uses older technology]. So what's so controversial about 3G? Most GSM subscribers and equipment makers have been in Europe. For Europeans, maintaining that leadership is important. The new technology from U.S.-based companies like Qualcomm threatens that. And that has led to standards wars and technology battles. But the European carriers need 3G to reduce their costs and to stave off, for a while at least, the further commoditization of wireless service. I expect 3G services in Spain, Finland, Germany, and the U.K. to begin in 2001, and a huge acceleration elsewhere in 2002 as 3G moves more customers onto the network. You were in Asia in May, sussing out 3G there. Any breaking news? The Koreans and Japanese are really pushing the envelope with the new technology. 3G networks will be installed by Korea's SK Telecom and Freetel this year, and by Japanese carriers KDDI, J-Phone, and NTT DoCoMo in 2001. And even China, which should award a GSM license to China Telecom, is expected to follow its neighbors with 3G. The country's 800MHz wireless spectrum-the dominant cellular frequency in the U.S.-is an unused asset that China wants developed locally. Based on signed contracts, China will spend some $10 billion a year to upgrade its wireless networks. In fact, last month China's Premier said it would adopt CDMA to get into the World Trade Organization. Qualcomm and China's ZTE, for example, have already announced a CDMA handset prototype, and the former is actively looking for local manufacturers. Where do you see more growth, Europe or Asia? In Asia by far. Though each region currently has roughly 190 million subscribers, Asia's market is only 6% penetrated, while four in ten Europeans already have a wireless phone. Equipment makers Ericsson, Nokia, and Motorola are all strong in Asia. Ericsson, the leader there, has two 3G contracts in Asia (and another 11 in Europe), including NTT DoCoMo's 3G network; Nokia has two in Asia, and Motorola is developing KDDI's CDMA network. But Nokia and Motorola will benefit most from China's aggressive cellular buildout (see China's Mobile Market). They have a bigger market share in China than in the rest of the world. Nokia does face competition in handsets-which accounts for two-thirds of its total sales worldwide-from Asian-based firms. For Motorola, though, China is pure gravy. It has a strong GSM and CDMA presence there, and a limited cost exposure because it manufactures locally. Wall Street has yet to recognize Motorola's strength in Asia. Its percentage share of China's wireless infrastructure market is twice its global share. So as Asia moves into 3G, Motorola looks attractive. It currently trades at a price-to-sales ratio of one-the same as life insurance companies. Moreover its P/E of 21 times 2001 earnings is half that of Ericsson, Nokia, and Nortel. << - Eric -

To: Keith Feral who wrote (8278)	11/27/2000 10:34:53 AM
From: LarsA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

I enjoyed reading them - Tero is "right on the money", in more ways than one, as he often is.

To: Keith Feral who wrote (8278)	11/27/2000 3:45:12 PM
From: Puck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Tero's illustriousness has recently been burnished further by his citation in a report by the President's Council of Economic Advisors entitled "The Economic Impact of Third-Generation Wireless Technology" (footnote 40): whitehouse.gov One of you two is influencing the development of the wireless industry and U.S. economic policy, and the other is demonizing him in infantile spasms of jealousy and insecurity and making a spectacle of himself in so doing. Can you connect the names with the descriptions? From one simple minded person to another-- Regards--

To: Keith Feral who wrote (8278)	11/29/2000 4:56:31 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

I was amused to find, on clicking 'respond' on Puck's obviously sacred thread to point out that Disney has withdrawn rights to include Minnie Mouse and other Disney characters on cellphone covers, that I have been banned! <You have been excluded from posting messages to this subject. Please contact the originator of the thread or SI to resolve the situation. > Disney has banned Nokia from using their characters because Disney is concerned about brain tumours and other health-damaging effects of microwave radiation. They don't want their image tainted with possible damage to people. Will they do a Disney character safety recall [like a Firestone tyre or something] to prevent Nokia's young customers meeting an early death due to Minnie Mouse on a phone? I heard Tero knows a thing or two about brains. What do you say Tero, are Nokia and Minnie Mouse causing cancer or other photonic damage in children's brains as Disney obviously thinks is possible? So, Uncle Scrooge, Donald, Minnie and Maurice have all been banned. Cool! Go Puck! You are hereby banned from my own sacred threads and here, so let's all make like a hockey stick and get the Puck out of here. Tero, you are not banned from here, just the Globalstar thread. Mqurice