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: qveauriche who wrote (129392)	5/28/2003 6:05:06 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Message Boards Mythology << Nokia once said that CDMA was a scientific impossibility. >> I guess all Scandinavian companies look alike to you, but Nokia never said that. They started their CDMA R&D in 1991, were active participants in ACTS and RACE, licensed CDMA from Qualcomm early in 1992, were one of the 17 original founders of CDG in 1994, and approached NTT DoCoMo early in 1997 with a proposal to combine an evolved GSM core network with an asynchronous WCDMA air interface for 3G. Makes a good story though ... - Eric -

To: qveauriche who wrote (129392)	5/28/2003 7:32:22 PM
From: LarsA	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

qveau, the reason I bring up this Bluetooth issue now and then is not to needle QCOM investors - I am one of them in a small scale but because when I think of true 3G, I don't see myself carry one device only. Voice would still be King or at least necessary to have at hand, comfortably. Maybe a good cordless headset connected to a small clever device (fountain pen size, battery capacity permitting) in a shirt pocket could do it. Minimal display, minimal tactile input, sort of the basic stuff you have to bring when you walk the dog. All the the different data applications however: streaming sound /video, location services with maps and GPS, radio & TV tuner, games, cameras, rich email -they all need a good display, hi-fi sound system, keyboard, processor capacity and a lot of specific memory, I would prefer to have that in a small PDA-or Nokia Communicator-like device - or maybe more than one. You bring it out when you sit at a table, or in an airport or on a train. It could also be part of the equipment in your car, to look at weather radars, listen to NPR or C-SPAN on demand on your way home from work. Bluetooth, if becoming popular, would be the gateway to all this - fast enough for most application especially if it had a big buffer for variation in cell capacity - but most importantly: technology agnostic. You bring the phone of your choice. Why have several contracts (unless they change their billing strategies) with phone companies just because you move from a phone, to a PDA to a laptop to a car? Maybe someone will advocate wi-fi? Instead of Bluetooth? Fine, if you like to broadcast beyond 10 meters, trust eavesdroppers and if you have the battery power, by all means. I don't need it except in my home or my office. If the broadband source is already paid for. And I buy my morning coffe in a drive thru. Latte. So then the question again: what part of all this this would give revenues QCOM? The way I see it it's not an IPR issue but maybe it's covered by the license anyway - e.g we want 5% or a minimum of $20 per tranceiver, which ever is higher. Or maybe my preference is not what people want - I certainly cannot understand the appeal of Nextels walkie-talkies, so I may be wrong... Lars

To: qveauriche who wrote (129392)	5/28/2003 7:54:07 PM
From: pyslent	Respond to of 152472

2. Mobility will thrive. And mobility will be overwhelmingly CDMA by the end of the decade. Qveauriche, I accept your 5 points as givens except this one. This is the one that causes me the most worry as a QCOM investor, as I'm not sure that the demand for mobility has been demonstrated to the extent that QCOm's valuation requires, nor am I 100% sure that CDMA will be the only avenue to serve whatever mobility demands exists. But you are spot on on the other 4 points <g>.

To: qveauriche who wrote (129392)	5/28/2003 8:38:56 PM
From: Dexter Lives On	Respond to of 152472

Whew! You feel better now?!? I'm glad you pointed out how certain QUALCOMM's position is... That explains why you're willing to pay for perfection. I guess the wall of worry is now in place - let's see what it's worth. Given everybody that wants to be long already is, and all the shorts are out, I can't help but wonder where the buyers are going to come from?? BTW I didn't create this bear market, in case that isn't perfectly clear to you -g/-ng The end of this rally (if it ever comes) will represent a solid long term exit from qcom positions, given the fundamentals at the present time. JMHO. Rob