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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (48622)	11/6/2001 11:36:47 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

Another good-news/bad-news scenario: The good news Forbes contributing editor Ken Fisher wrote in his column dated November 12 that "this market is most likely going to find a bottom in late December..." The bad news In his May 14 column he wrote that the Naz would bottom out at 1200. If he's right about both points, the Naz is gonna fall more than 33% before the end of the year. --Mike Buckley

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (48622)	11/7/2001 9:09:13 AM
From: Judith Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Mike-- I don't think Tom is squeaky clean either. Whether it's from self-interest or the optimism inherent in hard-charging entrepreneurs, I expect some level of "spin" that puts even bad events in a good light. To me that issue is qualitatively different from withholding material information. Given events of 9/11, no one in his or her right mind would have lifted an eyebrow over a warning from Q. The good news.... I remember flagging your concern about Q's booking investment income but excluding investment expenses. The practice, as you point out, is questionable and has come back to haunt. But given the manner of its most recent appearance, one must question not only the quality of earnings, but the judgment of the management team and their attitudes both to the Street and to their investors. I don't consider it "good news" that an issue you raised has been going on for some time and hence doesn't represent a change in direction or misdirection on management's part. A bad practice doesn't get any less worse because it's become ingrained or when it's so glaringly exposed. Some of us are not so quick on the uptake as you are. my wife isn't always thrilled.... Drops in net worth go with the territory. Of course, we all have to assess how we weigh management in our investment calculus. I can only say that I am deeply disappointed in Q's inability to stand up. For me, how leaders manage in bad times is far more important than just being able to click along when things are rolling. Perhaps my disappointment is even greater since I was one of those mesmerized by IJ's brilliance. Confidence in him and CDMA technology gave me patience for the long haul. That confidence has taken a blow. And I'd venture to say that your wife wouldn't stomach outright deception either. Judith

To: Mike Buckley who wrote (48622)	11/7/2001 9:42:08 AM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 54805

re: Qualcomm FY 2001 & FQ4 Earnings << The press release at the web site is available only in a very slow-loading pdf file >> You have the patience of ... <g> Right click on this and save target as (to disk) if your impatient: qualcomm.com Or for a good comprehensive summary from Qualcomm this loads reasonably quick: news.moneycentral.msn.com << Within minutes of the release of Qualcomm's earnings report, it's usually posted both here and in the moderated Qualcomm thread >> The fact that no earnings data is yet posted to the Moderated Qualcomm thread (aka the Qualcomm Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak no Evil, Cheerleaders Thread) still mystifies me. I shouldn't poke fun. It is a great thread, but it DOES mystify me. << You might remember that quite awhile ago I raised the issue that Q management was excluding so-called one-time investment expenses but wasn't excluding investment gains. >> I would like to call your attention to one post on the "Coming of Range" Thread by Jacob Snyder which comments on Qualcomm's Pro Forma v. GAAP in light of the fact that Qualcomm in fact posted a net loss of $44.5 million, or 6 cents per share: Message 16619099 I will add that there are a lot of footnotes to wade through to get to the real bottom line of Qualcomm earnings. I remain long on Qualcomm, and other than the fact that QCOM didn't advise us of the NOK license amortization (which absolutely flabbergasted me) there were no real surprises to me. I might add that given sector uncertainty I wouldn't take next years forecasted earnings to the bank yet. Forecasts are loaded to H2. Nobody knows what H2 will bring (although I'm pretty optimistic about it). << I don't have the keen memory you do regarding Thornley's comments in the conference call you mentioned. In the unlikely event that you're wondering if you're misremembering his comments >> Several of us on Moderated thread went back and relistened to Thornleys comments on the NOK license a month or so ago and he was MOST specific in response to a Q&A question on the NOK license fee hitting the books in SepQ. He said nothing about 1/27th of it hitting. One of my pet peeves about Qualcomm is that they do not archive much in the way of webcasts so it is difficult to go back and verify what someone said 3 months, 6 months, or a year back. That aside, every major wireless company has commented on the serious lack of visibility looking forward. This is the reason that Nokia has scheduled an interim CC 3 weeks before the end of every quarter, to avoid blind siding investors relative to guidance given 3 months in advance of quarter end. Good news is QCOM has opened better than some anticipated. - Eric -