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: Mark Fleming who wrote (15193)	9/25/2001 3:49:39 PM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197208

>>Remember, it's China.<< And remember, China is about to join the World Trade Organization, which means they have to play by the rules or face sanctions, which would include blocked access to overseas markets. Art

To: Mark Fleming who wrote (15193)	9/26/2001 3:10:05 AM
From: brational	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 197208

Greetings—this is my first post on this board, though I have been reading for a couple of months at least (this is by far the most informative and informed forum to discuss Qualcomm, and on-topic, thank you Ramsey!). I mostly post on the TMF board, and most of the time have little to add to the thorough discussion on this thread. I wanted to comment on the Korean flirt with TD-SCDMA. I think two things are behind it: (1) to get more business with/from China, Korean companies have to show interest in the home grown variety (as The Verve noted). Presumably, with their success overseas, the Samsungs of the world can help spread TD-SCDMA. I think it will pass; and (2) with the current whining about “unfair” royalty rates, this may be a way to send a message to Qualcomm; it too will pass. With regard to TD IPR, I did a post on TMF some time back about that; went to Siemens’ web site for some technical info., and reported on it in the following: boards.fool.com Here is the conclusion that I came away with: IPR-wise, it seems evident that TD-SCDMA requires all the fundamental know-how that makes CDMA work—there is no question that Qualcomm's IPR would apply, as has been recognized in the various 3G CDMA license agreements. It also requires GSM IPR, so it would be just as onerous as W-CDMA. But wait, what do the Chinese get? Some more IPR, presumably for putting CDMA inside TDMA in a synchronous way. So, TD-SCDMA= CDMA + GSM/TDMA + S. That's more than W-CDMA, and certainly much more than CDMA2000.