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 : 3G Wireless: Coming Soon or Here Now? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (441)	5/25/2005 9:24:48 PM
From: quartersawyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 666

cheerleading... Yikes. No genuflecting here. Terrible personality flaw, I admit... no unquestioning faith in anything. Qualcomm is my "favorite company" strictly proportional to my position, which for cause I would close and never look back. The "you" in "If what you're trying to figure is the $value" is generic as in "if what one is trying..." << If what you're trying to figure is the $value of the components of the body of patents, add-ons to a viable pioneering effort as the standard continually develops should not be just counted as eQuivalent, right?>> WRONG! [Excuse the shout, please]. Totally wrong not to mention somewhat misleading and naive, IMO. The "Q" is tongue in cheek, just a lob, not a serious pitch. Who would I be trying to convince of anything here? I'm responding to your post immediately, and before accessing the pdf link. But if it denies a heirarchy within the category "essential", it's missing something either by omission or by design. The global argument-- especially now in China-- seems to have always related to the Quality of the patents. Seems to me that all major vendors have accepted terms from Qualcomm that contradict your thesis that Qualcomm is hyperbole-driven.