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: Maurice Winn who wrote (103529)	9/1/2001 9:27:07 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Maurice: You wrote "QUALCOMM could borrow a few billion of Alan Green$pan's newly printed liquidity and low interest rates, combine that with some QUALCOMM shares and go shopping for some really good assets to synchronize with their CDMA promotion." Oooh, Maurice, they could... but first ask "why would they want to?" If you define a company's business as "what it does to generate increased shareholder equity", you may see why I ask. Since this is a classical definition of a business, it is not surprising that the SEC requires all companies to disclose it fully. Most people think it's in the lovely prose. But it isn't. Those statements for people to read are merely the clothes that wrap the emperor. The real business is articulated in numbers. Looking deep into the finances of this company we can see where the money actually comes from. If we know where to look. We don't have current data because this secret is published only once a year and isn't shouted up in the pro-forma press releases. Nevertheless, the most recent 10-K shows about 871,090 K$ cumulative retained earnings from stuff vaguely related to CDMA technology and 4,653,818 K$ cumulative minting of QCOM bank notes minus about 8,655 K$ of losses from other things (like international banking). This means that for every $1 that the company has ever earned, shareholders have coughed up a little over $5, so to hold $6 worth of equity. Which currently these old shareholders are happily selling to new shareholders for about $60 (an estimated figure with less than one digit of precision). Thus new shareholders enrich old shareholders, and fill the coffers of the company. So why would Qualcomm (the company) bother with any more real operations than they can get away with? John P.S. This is not an argument for the imminent collapse of Qualcomm the business. Indeed, seems to me that as goes wireless [EDIT: oops, I meant CDMA], so goes the revenue of Qualcomm. It is an argument to (a) avoid being one of those new shareholders though, and (b) for those old shareholders to hurry up and fleece new shareholders before the planet figures out (a)

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (103529)	9/1/2001 10:38:08 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Good points, Maurice, but no fair making them using words like "synchronicitous". For someone who conscientiously complains every time I misapply a lowly apostrophe, you certainly take some liberties with the english language. hmph. uf

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (103529)	9/2/2001 2:39:20 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Maurice, QUALCOMM is already committed to helping NextWave. As to the idea that QUALCOMM would want to buy spectrum and/or participate even inactively in the service provider business, I think that the company has been moving in the opposite direction--inventing and improving the technology, and allowing others to implement it. I see nothing wrong with a business plan that limits a company to remaining an idea factory. It is a good plan. Unfortunately, there are other players in this game bent on neutralizing those new innovations, despite their superiority to the existing dominant technologies. Art