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: Randall Knight who wrote (130205)	7/16/2003 2:05:06 PM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

The thing I find of interest here is the focus on China. How many handsets are Samsung and Mot selling in India? Not many I would guess compared to LG. LG is probably the largest seller of CDMA handsets in China but I think that Samsung is a strong second. The Reliance website features one handset from each manufacturer just about equally. Now if there is a substantial downturn in business, would QCOM have increased the dividend? I dont know about "substantial downturn".....I just think that Samsung and Motorola were less bullish than I was expecting. Both companies expect growth in the 3rd quarter in CDMA. There are conflicting data points on the inventory situation....Korea just reported $500 million in handset exports to China during the month of June. How are they exporting so much if there are 30 million units in inventory? Why didnt Samsung talk about more growth in CDMA instead of GSM? There are a bunch of unanswered questions....but I dont think that you can ignore the comments of Qualcomm's two largest customers and simply focus on an increased dividend (Qualcomm could afford to triple the dividend without straining). Slacker

To: Randall Knight who wrote (130205)	7/16/2003 4:33:10 PM
From: hueyone	Respond to of 152472

Now if there is a substantial downturn in business, would QCOM have increased the dividend? In the immortal words of Bobbi Fleckman in the rock and roll cult classic This is Spinal Tap, "Money talks. Bullshit walks." Come on, QCOM just increased the dividend from an insignificant, miniscule amount to another insignificant, miniscule amount. I wouldn't read too much into the declaration of a seven cent dividend on a stock priced at $37. Jmo, Huey

To: Randall Knight who wrote (130205)	7/16/2003 7:50:51 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Now if there is a substantial downturn in business, would QCOM have increased the dividend? you know, a year ago i was the lone voice in the wilderness saying that QCOM should have a dividend. all the cheerleaders said QCOM wouldn't pay a dividend because it had so many rosy opportunities to invest its wonderful cash flow in (you know, those great opportunities like Vesper, Netzero, etc.). so then QCOM finally started a cute little dividend of 5 pennies. i pointed out at the time that such a dividend seemed but a token, and was also a "me-too" maneuver in the wake of MSFT's dividend announcement. slacker chastised me because wasn't i the one who thought dividends were great? but the point is: a significant dividend is great. a token dividend is just that--a token. so now it doesn't surprise me, after MSFT's rumblings about disbursing some more of its cash hoard, to see another me-too dividend boost from QCOM. again, this is just a big yawner to me. (incidentally, given the startling regularity of QCOM's dividend announcements shortly after MSFT, it will also not surprise me if QCOM now abolishes options, adopts restricted stock grants instead, and restates its earnings to reflect the changes a la MSFT...if they use JPM to let their employees with underwater options cash them out, that would be icing on the cake and yet another nail in the coffin of options-expensing opponents--i think the QCOM BOD should wait at least two quarters before doing this, so as to reduce the risk of being accused by me of aping MSFT yet again. however, don't wait too long, because i want to be able to gloat once again that you do just what i predict :) a 7-cent dividend--what is that? annualized to 28 cents, that is well below 1%. as i have pointed out many times, the historical SPX dividend average is 4.5%. even after QCOM was bitchslapped by the market today (by an amount equal to about 7 quarters of the new-and-improved dividend, followed by another nearly 4 quarters worth of new-and-improved dividend after hours), with the after hours price of 37.06, for QCOM to offer just the SPX historical average dividend yield of 4.5%, they would need to increase the dividend to about 41.7 cents a quarter. if they keep increasing the dividend by two cents a quarter, then according to my abacus, they'll reach the SPX historical average dividend yield at the current share price after 17 more quarters. so excuse me if the extra two pennies today do not impress me. if they do it 17 more quarters in a row, however, i will be very impressed! of course, QCOM's dividend yield could also reach the SPX historical average yield without further dividend growth, if the share price compresses sufficiently...to 6.22 a share or so, if my abacus does not fail me. some comments from TSC on today's action. i am heartened to see that i am not the only one who compares QCOM to MSFT... thestreet.com The episode highlights the challenges confronting even the victors in a torpid tech market. In boosting its quarterly payout to 7 cents from 5, Qualcomm joined cash-rich peers such as Microsoft (MSFT:Nasdaq - news - commentary - research - analysis) in sharing an increasing amount of its winnings with investors. But the market sent an unmistakable signal back with Wednesday's decline: What counts is growth, which remains an elusive quality throughout the sector.