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: Ramsey Su who wrote (8406)	3/10/2001 3:10:13 PM
From: foundation	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197217

"..one has to wonder about what that poster from yahoo, tryharder(?), "predicted" months ago.." ---------- Ramsey, Tryhard, who posted on Raging Bull (last post Oct. 19, 2000) talked of plans for China Telecom, not Mobile... "Yes China Telecom! After the Unicom news fully digested tomorrow your time, I will start to bring the second subject: China Telecom plans for a even bigger 1.9 GHz CDMA network in China to include possibly 220 million CDMA users. Hold on to your hat. It will be something you never heard before. I am doing my due diligence first and check all sources and data. When it is ready, I will be the first one, before Qualcomm, to come out making the details available." At last word, Telecom won't receive its mobile license this year.... Will gprs prospects, seemingly dwindling by the day - and umts forcasts, receding to the horizon - effect Telecom's technology selection? I'm particularly fond of the recent report noting 12kbs as a "more realistic number for reliable data transmission" - it appears that "a number of (gprs) testing houses" presently engaged in testing carriers' networks have a different perspective than those marketing gprs services and handsets. <g> In addition, Seybold states that gprs networks won't be "up and running" until 2002, with the Durlacher Survey stating the gprs won't "take off" until some time in 2003. It could make for a grumpy Christmas 2001 in Euroland... Would MIII find a pleasing symmetry in one gsm carrier (Mobile), one cdma (Telecom), and one with both (Unicom)? "...why would China go WCDMA?.." To appear internationally balanced? I wouldn't be surprised if Mobile is saddled with wcdma - to appease Europe and its vendors - many of whom have made serious investments in China (in order, of course, to dominate markets and stifle indigenous competition). There was talk of requiring Telecom to go td-scdma for 3G, but to do so would be a death warrant in light of its immature development and technical limitations... also, attracting foreign investment (except, of course, from Siemens) would be impossible... I think Mobile will be required to wait in the rain for gprs and wcdma, Unicom will go 1x ev, with Telecom the wild card... ben

To: Ramsey Su who wrote (8406)	3/11/2001 1:20:34 PM
From: David E. Taylor	Respond to of 197217

Ramsey: The article you posted reminded me of this one from last November which summarized the views of MII's Xie Linzhen on the foreign monopoly of the Chinese mobile communications equipment market: chinaonline.com Xie noted that in 1997, 100% of the GSM equipment (switches, base stations and cell phones) was either imported or manufactured by foreign funded enterprises or Chinese/foreign ventures, with no purely Chinese-made equipment, and that this situation was improved only slightly by 1999. He also was reported to have said that: China has decided to take steps in order to promote the development of mobile communications equipment, especially the manufacturing of proprietary systems and products. More Chinese-made equipment will be used in building China’s mobile communications infrastructure. Priority should be given to Chinese-made equipment if all else is equal, and stricter control should be imposed on the direct import of mobile communications systems and products. In principle, no more GSM joint ventures or solely foreign-funded enterprises should be approved, the article said. Technical transfer in existing joint ventures should be accelerated to facilitate localization. Xie estimated that by the end of this year, proprietary Chinese switching systems will hold 40 percent of the domestic market, base stations will hold 25 percent, and cellphones will hold 15 percent. By the end of 2003, proprietary Chinese switching systems are expected to hold 70 percent of the domestic market, base stations will hold 50 percent, and cellphones will hold 40 percent to 50 percent, in addition to large export quantities, the article noted.. This statement, together with some of the points in the article you posted, indicate that: (1) The near term mobile network development will be focused on making mobile voice services available to a large proportion of the population - 200 million+ users by 2010. (2) CDMA 95A is the most spectrum efficient and cost effective way to achieve this goal. (3) Even though the GSM networks (mainly of China Telecom) will continue to expand, they will have a shrinking % share of the overall market. (4) 3G services can wait, and can be introduced gradually as demand materializes. We all know what the easiest and most cost effective upgrade path is to 3G. By the time the Chinese market is ready to start bringing in 3G in a few years time (2003 or so), they'll be able to see how the rest of the world has done (availability, performance and cost wise) with CDMA 1X etc. vs GPRS/EDGE/WCDMA. (5) MII is absolutely determined that domestic manufacturing capability will be expanded to supply the majority of GSM, and equally if not more importantly, CDMA equipment. None of this bodes well for the non Chinese GSM equipment suppliers. OTOH, it bodes very well for QCOM, and appears to be exactly the scenario Dr. J. % Co have been working towards. There's also a comment in the article about "rampant cellphone smuggling" of up to 5 million units in the first 6 months of 2000, worth about US$1.2 billion at an average handset price of US$242. I wonder how that plays on the concerns expressed here and on the other thread about QCOM's ability to collect 100% of the royalties due? JM2cW. David T.