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 (119130)	5/22/2002 12:10:14 PM
From: arun gera	Respond to of 152472

>my real point is not whether QCOM has the moral "right" to set up the payment scheme this way, but rather whether it will be accepted by the market to an extent which makes it profitable to QCOM, in excess of the marginal cost of capital spent on developing BREW and all the dollars lost on previous boondoggles.> Well. Everytime you make a phone call, you are paying a trasaction tax to the carrier. Charging per use is what carriers do. But they normally do not share the revenue with a software middleware provider. The carriers have their inhouse software departments that build applications that you and I rent hundreds time a day. Applications such as caller ID, voice-mail, call forwarding, and the whole telecom process itself is software driven. So all that the carriers are doing is outsourcing the middleware development to Qualcomm, not incurring as much of capital investment, having time to market advantages and sharing the risk and the reward with Qualcomm. Not all carriers want to do this. Many prefer to have their middleware developed in-house. Or just license the middleware platfrom such as WAP from Nokia and Openwave in a regular licensing arrangement, which may be charged based on the number of users on the system. Arun