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: propitious7 who wrote (35165)	5/28/2003 11:35:54 PM
From: Jim Mullens	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196536

Propitious7, From your account ( I can’t say thanks but appreciate your effort none the less) it sounds as if our Qualcomm execs did another excellent job in presenting Qualcomm’s message to the investment community. Form your observation, can you share with us how the message was received by the investment community- 1. Was the meeting well attended? 2. Did the audience appear attentive? 3. Afterward, were you able to speak with any of the analysts and get their impression of the presentation material? 4. Brian Modoff and I believe a lady analyst from Cowan were quoted in articles as saying words to the effect that “nothing new was reveled or nothing has changed”. Was that the general impression? 5. Tony did mention that he hoped the analyst community would focus more on the long term, rather than short term events. What was the reaction from the analysts to that suggestion and were you able to question any of the analysts as to why their mindset is only on the short term? 6. It has been noted before that Ed Snyder spent most of time at the hosted bar during Qualcomm presentations. Was the bar open during the presentations and if so was it well attended? I also noticed a few comments that might have been sent in my direction (gg) regarding- “will push their products in their markets but WILL NOT PUSH THEIR STOCK PRICE. So all posters who want Q to make statements or take steps to juice their stock price will be disappointed. What they do (e.g. with stock buyback fund) they will do quietly; they are not going to dump on competitors, boast of their reuslts or forecast out-year financial results.”<< I have posted in the past that I believe Qualcomm’s share price is significantly undervalued compared to market and its superior growth potential. Qualcomm must also share this view as reflected by its recently announced share buy-back program. I agree that an ethical company should not “push” or hype their stock price, but on the other hand I believe they should where possible come to the defense of their shareholder investors and present the best case possible as to support a reasonable and fair stock valuation. One of the primary concerns of the investment community is the apparent misunderstanding of Qualcomm’s/ CDMA’s future growth. Many analysts peg Qualcomm’s long term growth at 15% of less (some at 10%). The London day meeting and this meeting reflected independent consultant firms estimates for future handset sales by technology clearly showing that CDMA is the only area of growth in wireless. The prior chart in November even presented a better case than the similar chart in this briefing. Nokia and the competition are stating their intent to take market share from Qualcomm and presenting targets as to what they intend to do (Nokia- 25% CDMA market share in 2004). The analyst community tends to believe Nokia despite its many setbacks in CDMA and tends not to believe Qualcomm despite its many successes. I have complete confidence in Qualcomm long term as it has virtually been my full time job reading and attempting to understand the wireless industry issues for over seven years. Qualcomm’s share price continues to flounder as the market improves IMO primarily because of the analyst community and the media’s misrepresentation of the facts regarding Qualcomm’s and CDMA’s future growth. The analyst community and the media need to be educated. IMO it would not be “pushing” the stock price to simply provide that educational experience by showing a chart depicting 2007 handset sales estimates by technology (using the average of several consultants) and Qualcomm’s market share targets for each. This just might make some take notice or give the investing public a better idea of the magnitude to Qualcomm’s growth potential and some data to question their brokerage analysts. …….Example ……………………………..…….2002 act………2003 est……..2007 est CDMA2000 …..Total Market…………………….87………….106……………325 …...Qualcomm Mkt Share………….91%................85%...................75% …..Qualcomm Asic Sales…………..79……………90……………244 WCDMA …..Total Market……………………..0…………….4…………….175 …...Qualcomm Mkt Share………………………….50%..................50% …..Qualcomm Asic Sales………………………… 2……………...88 GSM/GPRS/EDGE (6300) …..Total Market…………………. 313…………...324……………100 …...Qualcomm Mkt Share…………..0………………1%...................25% …..Qualcomm Asic Sales…………...0………………3……………..25 Total …..Total Market…………………..400……….….430…………….600…….CAGR 8% …...Qualcomm Mkt Share………...20%................22%.................60% …..Qualcomm Asic Sales…………..79……………93…………….357……CAGR 40% JMHO (as always)- I’m an old timer and would prefer not having to wait another 3 or 4 years for the analyst community/media to get it right. jim

To: propitious7 who wrote (35165)	5/29/2003 7:52:47 AM
From: Arby	Respond to of 196536

Re: Shards and Shreds from Analyst Meeting Thanks propitious for the time and effort. I have "only" been lurking here for 6 months or so, trying to digest the alphabet soup and trying to understand the subtleties in the claims and counter-claims. Your post, among many others gems from regular contributors here, have been a big help in my education. arbywon

To: propitious7 who wrote (35165)	6/3/2003 12:16:38 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 196536

<the only direct conversion (ZIF) cdma chipset (GSM, in a sidebar question, he made clear has done this for years)> A major reason why GSM has held the line so long against CDMA. But it's Game Over for that advantage now. Increasingly, GSM is being forced up against the air interface advantage of CDMA. But there is still a lot of other stuff involved in delivering a minute or megabyte to a subscriber so GSM still has room to move. Mqurice PS: Thanks for the report.