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: pcstel who wrote (99718)	5/23/2001 6:12:44 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

<Have you ever seen the body expressions and the look on someone's face who is paying by the minute to be on the internet.. (like at a hotel business center).. They typically make alot of jestures with their hands like. Hurry Up!! Hurry Up!! This is costing me money here!!!> Have you ever tried being inside the body of somebody paying per minute?* I first gave it a go with Compuserve in the early 1990s. It was an exercise in paranoia and terror. Sweat, shouting, rapid heartbeat, urgent incantations and too-soon switchings off before the bill got too high, having downloaded nearly nothing. I took malicious satisfaction in dumping Compuserve as soon as I could. The information superhighway sure was a slippery sheep track covered in muck. Three years ago it was necessary to have a clock-watching attitude to life in the Web when renting service, even at home. It's not much better now even in cybercafes though ADSL at home is pretty cool - but it's still impossible to use a system in a hotel without risking burst blood vessels and apoplexy. QUALCOMM says they can manufacture megabytes with cdma2000 at 2c. With Wacky Wireless, they can instantly cut that to 1c and depending on the loading models they use, probably 0.5c per megabyte. If they use the Globalstar model, that'll mean they'll charge $2 a megabyte plus a big monthly charge whether you use it or not and very few people will use it. But if they charge it properly, they can produce megabytes at 1c and retail them for 4c and make big profits because they can produce a lot of megabytes from each base station. ADSL is nice but being stuck at the end of a wire is a pain. I'm ready for wireless and once I'm unwired, I don't see why my one account shouldn't work everywhere [more or less]. If they keep the prices low, cdma2000 is cheap enough that hunting down cheaper services wouldn't matter too much to most people. Mqurice * No, this is not some stupid reference to an 'internet mile-high club'.

To: pcstel who wrote (99718)	5/23/2001 9:26:11 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Why would a wireless operator take part of his spectrum that is generating "CASH PER MINUTE" charges in the voice segment.. And, let client's use the same spectrum for "All you can eat Data, for one price?".. Does that make sense? This depends on how scarce a commodity spectrum actually is....I believe that LEAP is showing that in many markets, spectrum is NOT the limiting factor for voice. It depends far more on the type of technology used and the coverage than on the spectrum each carrier has. If this becomes true for the national carriers (PCS/Verizon) there is a possability we could see unlimited HDR at a fixed price. Though I think that this price would be considerably higher than Q's suggestion of $40. So what if you were in DFW and DFW offered FREE 802.11 access, or you could use your "Pay by the Minute" HDR connection via VZ?? You have modems for both? Which would you chose? As long as you werent accessing your corporate intranet you would almost always choose the 802.11. It would likely be able to provide a higher speed connection. However, in the case you illustrate, Qualcomm has already made its money since the customer has both modems. I think that this is where your model breaks down....the type of customers that are going to be in the Admiral's lounge at the airport. They are generally going to be corporate users that travel extensively. It is this type of person who will put a premium on always having access....rather than waiting to be in a Starbucs or a aiport lounge. Generally, I think that the people who are carrying around a laptop at all times, are the ones who will put a premium on accessing the net at all times also.... OTOH....you are absolutely right that Qualcomm is going to lose some sales to 802.11 installations. College campuses are one area that come immediately to mind. I think that it is pretty likely that most spots on a college campus (library, dorms, union) would be outfitted with an 802.11 card....and students would be too cheap to pay for 1x/HDR instead. One question (I probably missed the answer).....are you suggesting that 802.11 cards will be installed in handheld PDA's/handsets? I have just been thinking of the laptop markets.... Slacker

To: pcstel who wrote (99718)	5/23/2001 9:34:23 AM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

>>And getting back to the Airports... don't forget those hefty Transfer Fee the Airports add to the bottom of your ticket price.. (XF) Would you be more inclined to have a stop-over at DFW vs .STL. if DFW Airport offered FREE INTERNET ACCESS via WLAN??? >> And if Wireless LANs are that much of a commodity, then all the major airports will have them and the $3 transfer fee gain will be neutralized. PCSTEL, I will grant you that Wireless LAN at the airport is not such a bad idea and may happen selectively. But forget about nationwide coverage that is even as good as current PCS coverage. Arun