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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Win-Lose-Draw who wrote (97496)	4/15/2001 4:34:21 PM
From: Peter J Hudson	Respond to of 152472

W-L-D, Sound bites don't help a stock achieve it's true value, earnings do. Investors that recognize companies that will have tremendous future earnings and buy on that basis are most successful. The trick with QCOM is to watch the fundamentals and wait. We are all amazed at how ignorant the investment community & CNBC are about QCOM, but that is what makes it a great investment. The hit it took on the news that China was waiting until 2002 to make a 3G technology decision is a wonderful example. The efficient market theory is BS! Bottom line the bad guys can't change the value of the company with FUD and the good guys can't enhance the value of the company with "sound bites". At some point the market will wake up to QCOM's potential, but even if they don't and the stock price is based on trailing earnings, as long as the earnings grow the stock price will too. As you know the QCOM fundamentals have never been better; China, India, Latin America, Sprint, Verizon. Alternative 2.5G & 3G technologies are late and faltering. During the last CC IJ gave positive guidance for both the second and third quarter. I have no idea what the economy is going to do to the market, but on a relative basis QCOM is still a great investment. Happy Easter Pete

To: Win-Lose-Draw who wrote (97496)	4/15/2001 11:29:02 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

<You don't own this stock for the sake of owning it, you own it because at some point you expect to sell it for a very nice profit. And if you can't provide "sound-bite" answers to some fairly basic questions, then who, exactly, do you expect to be buying the stock you will, ultimately, be selling? > On the contrary WLD, I hope never to sell QUALCOMM. It is much easier for me if QUALCOMM always remains vastly undervalued and just pays $50 per year dividend on a $50 share price. That way I don't have to try to figure out a selling price and pay capital gains tax [if it is ever introduced in New Zealand]. The common, ignorant shareholder will bid up the price of Q! when they see $5 turning into $10 with monotonous regularity. That's the only soundbit which matters in the long run. The cunning ones try to get in early and in the case of Q! it's still early days. Very, very early days. When the antitrust/monopoly lawsuits start accumulating at the door we'll know we are getting somewhere. Until then, things like BREW, Graviton, OFDM, Globalstar, SnapTrack, Technicolor, 724 Solutions, superconductivity, Metawave, fuel cells, Microvision, Wingcast, WK, are all grist to the mill and need to be understood. Mq