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: foundation who wrote (9233)	3/29/2001 9:50:17 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196985

As part of the WTO rules on telecom, members are required to open up their internal telecom markets to foreign investment. Hence, Q can operate a system in Australia, Vodafone can own 45% of Verizon, DT can own a GSM carrier in the US whose name I can't recall, etc. I don't know the specifics of the WTO rules, but I do know that they allow substantial foreign investment, if not outright ownership, in domestic carriers. There are several very interesting and informative articles on this issue and others which affect telecom in the recent edition of Foreign Affairs, which I commend to anyone who has an interest in the subject. The NYT article posted by grinder965 noting Vodafone's takeover plans for Verizon are probably appropriate from a WTO standpoint. There is probably little that can be done from a legal standpoint to prevent such a takeover. And a takeover makes sense because the only way that Euro carriers will survive their 3G spectrum binge is to consolidate globally. What are the consequences to Q should Vodafone take over Verizon and other consolidation steps take place? Beats me but I would suggest two different scenarios: First, WCDMA is likely established as a predominant standard. Nokia could then threaten to mount legal challenges to Q's IPR. Result: A compromise in which Q's royalty rate is reduced. Still good for Q but not as good as the possibiliy of CDMA2000 establishing itself as a serious competitor. In that scenario, multi-mode phones should take care of the roaming/"seamless network" issues. I suppose the problem is that multi-mode phones will be more expensive and not as prevalent, cutting into Vodafones ability to demand discounts. This would lead ultimately to a competitive disadvantage, which is exactly what the NYT article pointed out. I'm beginning to see the light. I think.

To: foundation who wrote (9233)	3/29/2001 10:14:22 AM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196985

I am not sure pols can stop it except through anti-trust. WTO rules say you can't discriminate against foreign investment: we honor that and Euro finds ways around it. And, Bush administration has yet to make appointments or get them confirmed, and there are lots of career asses left who were there during Clinton administration that stopped Sprint-WCOM merger. Justice Department dumb enough to think ATT is the only American carrier we need, and to think it is still an American carrier. Has anyone read the entire CIBC report? How does it handle China. 6 cents per share is the royalty on China infra.