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: carranza2 who wrote (114133)	2/23/2002 12:38:02 PM
From: kech	Respond to of 152472

John's point, as I appreciate it, is that why should Q make CDMA investments if it is going to have a piece of all CDMA-based 3G. It is a good point, albeit a purely rhetorical one. The end equilibrium in some form of CDMA is not in doubt, the part that is in doubt is how quickly it gets there. Left to their own devices the Euros would waste another 5 years on GPRS and maybe only deply W-CDMA in a few European centers. With the hot breathe of GSM1x breathing down their backs they might go a bit faster. Hence the investment is very important.

To: carranza2 who wrote (114133)	2/23/2002 1:42:46 PM
From: GO*QCOM	Respond to of 152472

The Euro's now have a choice to establish 3G in existing narrow band spectrum (GSM1X) ASAP or once WCDMA is established in the newly auctioned spectrum ,the existing spectrum in Europe could be converted to CDMA 2000 (GSM1X)giving the Euros lots of high bandwith choices and flexability due to the multi- mode chips from QUALCOMM.No question that all the angles are being exploited by QUALCOMM.If WCMA is very delayed it may be the only thing that saves there sorry asses.Time to accumulate more QCOM shares.

To: carranza2 who wrote (114133)	2/24/2002 12:37:26 AM
From: engineer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

It is so much easier to make a looking backward judgement of what should have been done than it was to be at the point of decision and have to make a judgement on what would it take to win a market. One can take the same approach to criticizing the infrastrucure division that IMJ built up. At the time, it was the only way to force the LU/MOT people to stop promoting NAMPS/TDMA and get them into making CDMA. but in 1998, if you looked at it, you had LU, MOT, and NT all making CDMA infrastrucure and the value of that group was no longer viable. Q had alot of vendor finanacing and alot of R&D burn rate at the time they sold the division and you could have criticized that alot. but at the time the division choice was made to build the industry and get it out there commercially, it was the right choice. If you continue to play monday morning quarterback, then perhaps you can pick and choose what you want to criticize, but in some of these the investment was made for a specific reason at the time. And on some of these, even though they may be looking bad now, the long term point for exit and profit has not been reached. Even G*, which at the moment seems to have no value may come back to be a giant investment that Q made wisely. Or NextWave. Even though these have been written down now, they may still come back with future value. And on CDMAOne being a legacy, it will continue to be used in the lower capacity locaitons for a long time, just as the 1984 technology known as AMPS is still the most viable backbone of the entire AT&T network and the entire wireless network in the US....