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: hueyone who wrote (125818)	12/3/2002 4:44:58 AM
From: the_rich_janitor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Ironic for you to use the word presumptuous and then suggest I move boards. Are you someone more important than me or are you someone who knows more about CDMA than me? I think my post was clear that I also welcome John and his challenges. Is it fair to assume that his sarcastic post deserved no challenge? Enjoy a double standard if you will, but do not expect misinterpretation of the facts to go unchallenged. Now, if you care to talk about QCOM, CDMA, GPRS or 3G.......... Note: Please direct year 2012 guidance and ignorant questions about poor Chinese people be able to afford cell phones to someone else. By the way, Huey. Can we call a truce before it begins? Seriously, I appreciate challenging questions and commentary. I just think that John has proven that he is strong enough to take back whatever he dishes out. If he wasn't he would have been gone a long time ago. I have no beef and yes, I am extremely presumptuous. Forgive me if I don't respond but I am on a flight to China tomorrow to try and talk some people into buying cell phones instead of water and electricity.

To: hueyone who wrote (125818)	12/3/2002 10:22:56 AM
From: Jon Koplik	Respond to of 152472

Re : "enjoy having John (S.) around to challenge their assumptions" -- at the risk of starting a gigantic "cat fight," I want to tell you when and why I put John S. on "ignore" -- A while back, those of us who read every post here were subjected to probably at least 100 posts along the line of : "If Qualcomm is so great, how come Qualcomm's book value (today) is so low ?" A certain person was responsible for endlessly asking the question again and again, AND ignoring what I thought was a very simple and short (and obvious) answer (posted by me). That answer was : IF Qualcomm decided to sell their entire IPR (intellectual property rights) holdings to another company today, then Qualcomm would probably "book" a gain of something on the order of tens of billions of dollars. They would immediately lose about 1/3 of it in U.S. corporate income taxes, possibly have no business future, BUT ... would be able to make the Qualcomm balance sheet have a nice high book value. Despite this explanation, the posts complaining : "Where's the book value ? Where's the book value ? Where's ..." went on and on and on. That was when I engaged the "ignore" feature. Jon.