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: carranza2 who wrote (50667)	3/1/2006 8:40:48 AM
From: Jim Mullens	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 197208

C2, Re: NOK6 (POS) / Q raising royalty rates, and “ “It's a deduction from the fact that we have found out today that Q does not really offer a smorgasbord deal. The fresher dishes per PJ are excluded from the menu. They either have to be negotiated for separately or included in a new license.” I did not read it that way from Paul’s GS comments yesterday. I understood Paul to be saying, 1. that licenses are established for a time certain and additional IPR developed over that period are included within that royalty rate (improvement period). 2. At the end of that period, licenses are subject to renewal and are renegotiated. 2.a. ...The licensee of course wants the royalty rate reduced because of old IPR, perhaps with certain patents having expired . 2.b. The Q counters that new patents have been developed over that time that are equally / more valuable (EV-DO, HSDPA, OFDM, MIMO, etc). 2.c. The outcome per Paul>>>” we generally maintain the status quo” Perhaps in some cases, the original licensees such as NOK and MOT received very favorable terms and perhaps they have / are now being brought in line with the “standard” rate---~ 5%. Again, Altman’s statement from Nov ’05 London Day “The other thing that I wanted to point out is that there's not an additional QUALCOMM royalty above our standard WCDMA, CDMA2000 royalty rate. So what this means is if you look back over the last 10 years, you've seen that our patent portfolio has grown very substantially. We haven't increased our royalty rate during that time, so a licensee gets access to more and more of our patented technology.” Thus, I believe it incorrect to deduct “that Q does not really offer a smorgasbord deal” IMHO-