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: Stock Farmer who wrote (103553)	9/2/2001 5:25:50 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

John, you exceeded the Shannon rant limit for Buy Range channel capacity and boy are you for it now. I just need to take a deep breath. ncrg.aston.ac.uk First, I will look for something you wrote that I agree with. Well, here's something. <Q! must attract a further 45 Billion dollars of PROFIT in constant dollars before generating so much as one dollar in return> In 10 and 20 years, there will have been a lot of money printing so not only will income be increased, but so will the capital value of the company in the currency of the day. So not only is owning that $45 billion market capitalisation an expectation of profit, it's also a preservation of capital in that it's a protection against inflation. Asset inflation is assured as has been the case ever since money was invented [give or take a few oddities - such as the Nikkei since 1990]. I understand that if the money is divided in two [in the same way as stocks are split in two] there is no value added. But it is a heck of a lot better to own a real asset when the $ is split in half than to own the $1 [because they don't actually split it in half, they just print themselves another one and dilute the existing owners by half]. So owning money leads to a halving whereas owning real producing assets leads to a protection of capital value. Some of the Dow gains are due to inflation rather than that the world is richer now. Certainly the world is richer in that we have all mod cons which are produced with a little bit of work by the producers, so they are really cheap compared with our hourly rates. But the Dow market cap increase over the past 70 years is a lot to do with inflation, as well as growth in productive enterprise which has also been huge. None of those three trends [inflation, productivity growth, capital growth] trends is going to end any time soon. Neither is the technological revolution which is part of productivity growth as well as a qualitative improvement in people's lives whether or not it leads to any profit. Okay, I have run out of breath for now. Lucky you. I disagree with some things too. For example, one pedantic point to show your wild exaggeration [which is normally my job] <Your reference to "6 billion or so" waiting for CDMA overstates the practical case by something representing an order of magnitude. > An order of magnitude less is 600 million. There are nearly that many cellphone users now. Any reasonable projection shows 1 billion cellphone users in a few years. ALL 3G plans are for mobile CDMA. So it is easy to see that by 2010 there will be at least 2 billion people with a CDMA phone of some sort, even if China and India don't improve economically, which is hard to imagine given the trends. Pausing for breath, Mqurice