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 Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jackmore who wrote (29812)	12/7/2002 10:23:30 AM
From: John Biddle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197208

Why not? They have to have something to negotiate with...and to fuel the FUD machinery. The fun part is that this FUD machine could affect Eurovendors as much as Q, maybe more so. After all, which tech has higher royalties? If the WCDMA vendors were to agree to cut their aggregate royalties to the bone, to be equal to CDMA2000 and close to TD-SCSMA, what would those vendors have left in the technology which would encourage them to continue to support it? They would have given up their huge economic advantage over competing vendors and will have to compete purely on merit. Not a comforting prospect for them. Also, I doubt that they can deliver on greatly reduced total WCDMA royalties, because there are so many companies to rein in, some of which have profit prospects ONLY if they get some royalties, since they will not be manufacturing.

To: jackmore who wrote (29812)	12/7/2002 4:34:43 PM
From: foundation	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197208

re: Zhou Huan, chairman of Datang, said TD-SCDMA... ========== In my view, Dantang's posture is of little concern to Q. In my view, Dantang has no leverage - because they're unable to develop TDsCDMA internally. Their only hope for standard and ASIC development hinges on outside vendors like NOK, TI and others who are bound to Q agreements and/or subject to US/European/Japanese copyright standards and enforcement. Unless Dantang and ZTE and Huawei can do it on their own, Q can cut them off. I can't see a way around that. And to MII's eternal frustration, they're years away from possessing the requisite skills. I don't see that Dantang has a card to play, and I wonder if that may be Q's view. I don't think Q has any need to deal with Dantang - other than to politely state the riot act. From what I've read, TDsCDMA (or UTRA-TDD) is not a candidate to become a stand-alone solution for macro cell mobile data. In that sense, I don't think a China carrier can pragmatically choose TDsCDMA for its primary 3G mobile network. TDsCDMA may well have a role with micro/pico cell data applications and personalized services (dense urban areas with concentrated data demands, private corporate connectivity) - though it may also be limited to fixed service. In that light, I see the MII spectrum allocation for TDsCDMA as a symbolic, painless, cost-free show of support, easily reversed. And UTRA-TDD will be the TDD standard of choice for 3GSM vendors elsewhere for unpaired spectrum and applications noted above. Indeed, 3GSM vendors will never market TDsCDMA for use outside China... UTRA-TDD development and implementation is already planned (provided they first succeed with FDD UMTSwCDMA). LOL! I think I'm dead on target that Q is MII's only opportunity to globally export TDsCDMA. Only Q knows if it's worth the hassle and potential rewards. Dantang recently tossed out the figure of $2B needed to commercialize TDsCDMA. They've a long way to go. Dantang's Zhou has a large mouth and is making the most of his moment, but MII isn't reinforcing his extreme position. MII's comments have often implied an understanding of TDsCDMA's limitations, and that its use would be accessory and specific - which runs quite contrary to Zhou's inflated rhetoric. Indeed, MII has stated that carriers will choose for themselves, though this also strains credulity.