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: Jacob Snyder who wrote (51186)	5/1/2002 3:47:23 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Jacob, I think you are conflating the function of the treasurer with strategic investments. The treasurer is responsible for the 'cash and equivalents' management. I am sure that QCOM went through a process to evaluate how much cash on hand they needed to reserve for the next 12 months. The treasurer will then invest the rest in a combination of money market accounts, t-bills, bonds, etc to manage risk/return. A well managed treasury will have produced detailed investment requirements and given them to their banker to satisfy. I do not think you can assume, from the on-going losses at QSI, that the treasury function at QCOM cannot manage risk. Dollars to donuts says that the treasurer objects regularly to the QSI investment on the same grounds you do. I have no recollection of QCOM having to restate or write-off anything due to standard treasury activity. QSI, on the other hand, ... it is still partying like it's 1999. Paul

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (51186)	5/1/2002 4:20:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 54805

Jacob: Re:<<Before CDMA was accepted as the Global Standard for 3G, these gambles were necessary. Today, they aren't. Alternately, if you think they still need to invest in startups like Pegaso, then that means CDMA's position as a future Global Standard is not secure.>> Pegaso was part of the Ericsson agreement which Qualcomm took as a means of completing the deal. Each of Qualcomm's investments had a purpose. They still do. As you say, some have been successful financially to date, others not. But all were to advance CDMA around the world. You may think that need is over, I do not. For example the opportunity to introduce CDMA in 450 K frequency is very current. WLL is an area where careful investments by Qualcomm could be seeds well planted - and profitable financially also. And a major noncash loss this last quarter was because the warrents Qualcomm took when it spun off LEAP Wireless went down sharply in price. To me, the decision to spin off LEAP Wireless was a good fundamental as well as financial move. The recent decline in price of its stock may be temporary as LWIN fundamentals show excellent prospects. But who knows? But I suggest the original decision made sense, and now we have a financial result that is negative due to accounting requirements. If LWIN gains value, that result will be positive. We shall see over the next quarters. But again, you make your choices, I make mine. Your choice to cut back or get out of Qualcomm. Mine is to hold. Best. Cha2