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: Jack Bridges who wrote (114141)	2/23/2002 6:18:06 PM
From: Willie263	Respond to of 152472

My thoughts exactly, Jack Although you state so, in words much more refined than my thoughts. This guy appears to be intent on convincing us QCOM is a poor investment with an outpouring of words similar to a used car or real estate salesman. Can't help but wonder what his agenda is.

To: Jack Bridges who wrote (114141)	2/23/2002 7:41:43 PM
From: S100	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

My thoughts also, plus having read many companies reports as well as books on how to read them, wondered how I had missed such an important item. Reviewing my GAAP and other books, I do not think it is of much importance. Earnings, cash, debt, amount of income tax paid, and others are more important. After all, if the company needs cash, not likely that the retained earnings could be given to a bank in exchange for cash, no questions asked. Snip Retained Earnings shows the amount of income allowed to accumulate from the beginning of the corporation's life to the present. Retained Earnings represents a claim on assets, but it is not cash. Snap coba.usf.edu After wandering around the outside of the buildings owned by QCOM, which take about a city block, I think they are valued at much more than retained earnings number and were paid for from earnings. These are not old WWII buildings in a run down area but are nice, mostly fairly new buildings in an upscale area. I am not up on commercial real estate but suspect they are worth much more than the number on books. They also rent a number of buildings spread through out SD, so not all of the buildings you see with the QCOM logo are owned by them.

To: Jack Bridges who wrote (114141)	2/24/2002 12:44:03 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Respond to of 152472

Ok, you forced me to confess: I'm pretty good at faking how articulate I am, and really my IQ is quite abysmally low. Indeed, your wit and cunning has unmasked me. I'm one of these tech-wannabe pseudo-nerds who never got admitted to the chess club and have been dying to wear the pocket protector and taped-together glasses that mark me as admitted to the inner circle ever since. I got turfed on my keester after having lost everything shorting the market from '91 to '00, and in desperation I replied to one of those innumerable junk emailings that clutter my hotmail. Apparently a bunch of shifty guys with shifty eyes had this scheme that they would take widely held and highly liquid stocks and use influential and highly regarded message boards like SI to talk down the stock and make a killing on the short side. After rubbing both of their neurons together, they figured that if some anonymous nobody shows up and posts unpopular, baseless and preposterous positions for long enough that other folks will believe the negative tripe despite their better judgement and thus be fooled into pushing the "Sell" button when instead they should be backing up the truck. Thus would this scheme succeed in driving down the price and making our short and shifty shills a killing. And me, well, I'm dumb enough to believe that scheme will work. So despite my deeply held conviction that Qualcomm is a stock destined to go up and up and up, I have decided to come to this message board and post my manipulative nonsense. Confident that everyone here is so dumb and complacent that they'll never see the flaws in my shifty web of sleazy logic. And so I work hard at it. Day after day I sit at my desk contemplating what evil scheme I will hatch tomorrow. And one of these days... one of these days I'll have made enough money by shorting the stocks I write about that I'll be able to leave my boiler room and retire and read and write whatever I like whenever I want without being scared that people might clue in to my nefarious motives. Oh, how I dream for that day... ... ROFL Or maybe what I am posting is the truth as I perceive it to be. And maybe through diligent hard work and some astute and lucky investments I have been able to retire early and leave the realm of schemes and machinations behind. And maybe that's why I have lots of time on my hands and some knowledge of how things work. And maybe posting to SI is a hobby. And maybe I am just speaking my mind. Not unlike yourself and everyone else who posts to public message boards. My friends (who know who they are) will recognize what I post as the truth. And that's all that matters to me. Really, does it matter to you what I reply? Aren't folks going to just go on to believe whatever they want to believe? Whether or not something is the truth seems quite subordinate to preconceptions of "good" and "evil". Which aspect of human nature is precisely what the banksters and fraudsters and touts and the entire Wall Street marketing arm rely upon in parting people with their money in the stock market. Only it seems that people like to believe "up up and away" much more than "look out below". And take more kindly to people who tout to the upside than those who warn in the other direction. Some days I wonder why I bother to post and put up with the flak and jabber. But every once in a while I get some support 'cause someone I've never met says "thank you". And that's kept me going. John