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: Maurice Winn who wrote (35249)	6/4/2003 8:30:08 AM
From: kech	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196562

Unless you have personally observed something negative or false, assume it's untrue - for some reason, there are lots of people out to denigrate QUALCOMM. I just heard another earful about all the "traps" and false leads that qualcomm put into their chip design to prevent others from developing CDMA chipsets. To hear it you would think reverse engineering was an entitled right and anybody doing this was guilty of skullduggery of the worst kind. The very thing I had always heard on this thread, "virtuousity and mastery of CDMA" which prevented others from successful CDMA chipset development suddenly became just a skill of covering your tracks. It seems you would really have to be a chip designer to know which story is really accurate, and maybe it doesn't matter anyway. Anybody with experience in chip design or first hand knowledge of why Nokia chip designers feel this way about Qualcomm?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (35249)	6/4/2003 11:08:59 AM
From: bdog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196562

"- for some reason, there are lots of people out to denigrate QUALCOMM." A reasonably objective observer over the past 6 or 7 years would be hard pressed to come up with a different conclusion. The question is, why? Obviously there are the commercial interests of Ericcson, Nokia and the whole European cabal but this seems (to me) insufficient to account for the relentlessness of the campaign and its shameless intractability in the face of countervailing proofs and even apparent self interest. There is more than meets the eye here but it may be counterproductive to speak its name.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (35249)	6/4/2003 12:17:50 PM
From: quidditch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196562

<It's amazing how long the nonsense has carried on. The urban myths just seem to carry on and get handed down from generation to generation.> So true. NOK has a seeming stranglehold on the imagination and purse strings of much of the investing community. Case in point: QCOM shares rallied strongly (first time in a while) yesterday, presumably because NOK announced that it had obtained a license from MII to manufacture CDMA phones in China. That is a positive for the Q, but for the Street to reward Q for additional NOK "support" in China is ironic in light of Q's China strategy--to decouple the manufacturing control of the GSM cabal from local control and profit in CDMA handset manufacture. I hope NOK's market share of China CDMA handsets is meager, and that yesterday's rally was entirely misplaced. quid