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: David E. Taylor who wrote (113228)	2/13/2002 9:02:20 PM
From: Caxton Rhodes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

David- One more thing, is that we need to take out the Dec high in the low 60s before any up trend would be confirmed as anything other than a bear rally. Of course if we can close above 70 that would take care of the June and Aug 01 highs as well. Hows that for positive thinking? Time frame? Dec 02! Cheers, Caxton

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (113228)	2/13/2002 9:19:16 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Anybody know anything more about this? (From grantsinvestor.com Turning to the news, there are a handful of things worth discussing. More accounting questions are being answered as the SEC appears to be looking into (in no particular order) Microsoft, Qwest (Q), and EMC. I suspect this list will grow somewhat portly as the sleuths target the various and sundry shenanigans that aided and abetted corporate America in its pursuit of higher stock prices, no matter what. Regarding SEC's investigation of EMC, a former company executive claims that they improperly booked sales, specifically, that goods were shipped to certain resellers so as to avoid having to account for inventory. Whether EMC did this, I do not know. But I do know that tactics like stuffing the channel, shipping product after the end of the quarter, etc. are practices rumored to have occurred at many companies in the last few years. And after seeing what corporate America is capable of doing, would anyone be surprised to learn that the suspicions have merit?

To: David E. Taylor who wrote (113228)	2/14/2002 12:22:35 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

>> But I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that QCOM's well positioned future is not that obvious to that nebulous entity known as "the market", so chart patterns/technicals may well prevail until the revenues/earnings begin to "speak for themselves". I reluctantly agree, David. How long do you think it will take for Q's numbers to impress Mr. Market? Imo Q's inability to reflect the progress of their enterprise in their balance sheet thus far has been a major disappointment. uf