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: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (112514)	2/8/2002 12:07:10 PM
From: quasi-geezer	Respond to of 152472

does anyone knows anything any more, Jesus ...

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (112514)	2/8/2002 12:12:02 PM
From: idler	Respond to of 152472

it doesn't matter whether they included financings in pro forma numbers or not, as long as the exact financings and the amount of exposure was accurately recorded and disclosed and it is clear to anyone who wants to add them back in that GAAP numbers or whatever would have been "x" whereas pro forma is "y." The point of Enron was that nothing was clearly or accurately disclosed and it was impossible for an analyst, let alone ordinary investor, to get a full and accurate picture. If Q is in the same boat, I would truly be shocked.

To: Wyätt Gwyön who wrote (112514)	2/8/2002 12:12:04 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

well, they don't include them in the pro forma numbers, for one. i don't know what is going on, but this is pretty incredible. Understood...but that is hardly deceptive accounting. The GAAP and cash flow numbers are also provided. There really isnt anything particuarly complex about their numbers. I guess the market might be having a problem with owning pieces of companies that are customers. However, these companies werent set up simply to provide revenue to Qualcomm (ala Enron). MSFT and INTC do identical things.... Interesting that the report came out right when Qualcomm was sitting at a 52Wk low. TA'ers have been saying that Qualcomm would have fallen pretty hard once it broke through that....the report just made it worse. Slacker